YEC Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed

Postby MisterGordons » Tue Feb 21, 2017 10:43 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:Sounds from what Sorensen writes that Gordons may have gone crying to him and Sorensen has deduced that Gordons has given up - which is a bit odd if my reasoning powers are so poor as this proven liar will never ever stop falsely alleging.


Ashley Haworth-Roberts has admitted in the past that Cowboy Bob Sorensen reads posts in this forum. Suddenly he suggests that I contacted him about this. Such a suggestion is ridiculous.
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

Gordons - another compulsive liar YEC

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Feb 21, 2017 8:45 pm

MisterGordons wrote:Ashley Haworth-Roberts claims that Cowboy Bob Sorensen did not demonstrate logic in his criticisms and the Cowboy claims that he did so. The Cowboy is correct. Ashley Haworth-Roberts attacks the Cowboy and has tantrums but has never said, 'Here is why Sorensen's claim that my logic fails are erroneous'. The Cowboy has repeatedly demonstrated over a long period of time that Ashley Haworth-Roberts does not understand logic.



Follow Jesus liar Gordons. Not Cowboy Bob.

And stop trolling and twisting my words - whilst ignoring all their detailed content.

"Ashley Haworth-Roberts has admitted in the past that Cowboy Bob Sorensen reads posts in this forum. Suddenly he suggests that I contacted him about this. Such a suggestion is ridiculous."

I wrote:
"Sounds from what Sorensen writes that Gordons may have gone crying to him and Sorensen has deduced that Gordons has given up ...". This was after Sorensen wrote on Facebook: "Mr. Gordons wasted his time trying to talk reasonably with Haywire the Stalker and showing his lack of integrity and reasoning powers at this link...". It is a fact that Gordons is 'close' to Sorensen (some have even suggested that he 'is' Sorensen using a false identity although I am not persuaded of that).
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

A web of YEC lies

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:29 am

It is the case that the Hawaiian islands form a 3,000 mile long linear chain along the path of the Pacific tectonic plate which is moving northwest at a measured rate of 5-10 cm per year. The islands are made of volcanic basalt, and have been dated by the potassium/argon radiometric method. They display a linear range of ages as a function of distance from a volcanic hot spot under the plate. The oldest islands (at the northwest end), at close to 65 million years, are most distant from the youngest island (Hawaii itself, at the southeast end), which is still volcanically active and sits over the volcanic hotspot. The plate is calculated to have moved 3,000 miles in 63 million years - that fits closely with the current rate of movement. There is no way to explain scientifically these convergent data in terms of a '6000-year old' earth. There is no reason to believe that the rate of movement of the plate has varied significantly over geological time. And there is a linear relationship between the measured ages of the islands and their distance from the volcanic hotspot.
https://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/HCV/haw_formation.html
"As the plate moves over a fixed spot deeper in the Earth where magma (molten lava) forms, a new volcano can punch through this plate and create an island. The Hawaiian Islands are believed to be formed from one such 'hot spot'. As the plate moves away, the volcano stops erupting and a new one is formed in its place. With time, the volcanoes keep drifting westward and getting older relative to the one active volcano that is over the hot spot. As they age, the crust upon which they sit cools and subsides. This, combined with erosion of the islands once active volcanism stops, leads to a shrinking of the islands with age and their eventual submergence below the ocean surface."

As usual young earth creationists are in utter denial:
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2017/02 ... lands.html
"According to secular geologists, the Hawaiian islands are millions of years old. This figure is primarily reached through the highly suspect methods of radiometric dating." It is more complicated than that, and radiometric dating is far from 'suspect'.
"Uniformitarianism, the belief that the slow, gradual processes observed today have been constant and unchanging, can work against secularists. [How? When? Not in this example, certainly.] Using their assumptions and methods, the observed rate of erosion for the Hawaiian islands shows that they cannot be millions of years old! In fact, recent creation and the Genesis Flood geology presented by biblical creationary scientists are by far the best answers to the age and formation of the islands."
http://www.icr.org/article/9751
The ICR writer makes a number of claims regarding the islands' geology - referring eg to lava tubes and erosion rates - in an effort to persuade that the islands all were formed 'recently' within biblical timescales and apparent during Noah's Flood. NONE of these is backed up by ANY peer reviewed science paper.
The link I supply above (originally supplied by David Levin and posted previously on this discussion forum) reports that "beyond Kure [in the far northwest of the chain] the Hawaiian chain continues as a series of now-submerged former islands known collectively as the Emperor seamounts". Islands produced by the volcanic hot spot would not been totally eroded to become distant seamounts in just 4,500 years! The link also states that "the two primary volcanoes that make up Oahu (where Honolulu is) have not erupted for well over a million years". There is no suggestion that the eruptions ceased much more recently in 'historic' times.
Clarey claims (seemingly contradicting the text within his - non-YEC -footnote 3):
"This erosion process would completely destroy the islands in only a few hundred thousand years. Doing the math, we get 76 miles of erosion in only one million years (at 0.4 ft/yr), which would completely eliminate the islands—except possibly the Big Island where volcanism is still occurring since it currently sits on the hot spot. If the islands are really millions of years old, they should have eroded beneath the sea long ago."
That calculation appears broadly correct. But the writer does not clearly consider the FULL context. For instance that - as his third footnoted article clearly states in its headline - "70 Percent of Beaches Eroding on Hawaiian Islands Kauai, Oahu, and Maui" (70% not 100% and some beaches are accreting too?). Also the convergent data mentioned above did not include 'uniformitarian' erosion rates on all islands and all coastlines across the last 63 or so million years.
Also, Clarey's claim did not appear here as far as I can see - which suggests it is a made-up 'fact':
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/pl ... -paradise/ (I debunked this here when it first appeared on the AiG website.)

Does anyone else wish to comment? Have I overlooked anything?
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: A web of YEC lies

Postby MisterGordons » Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:21 am

'Does anyone else wish to comment? Have I overlooked anything?'
Ashley Haworth-Roberts has overlooked science and reason. He links to and quotes people who disagree with the material that Answers in Genesis and the Institute for Creation Research and Cowboy Bob Sorensen have said. He has not shown that anyone is lying. I submit to all that this kind of posting further supports my conclusion that Ashley Haworth-Roberts does not understand science but is attempting to use it as well as denigrate other people for the sole purpose of building up his own ego. Notice that the creationists did not resort to name calling of the secular scientists. Ashley Haworth-Roberts attempts to sway the emotions of people. The Cowboy has proven this many times.
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

Re: A web of YEC lies

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:18 pm

MisterGordons wrote:'Does anyone else wish to comment? Have I overlooked anything?'
Ashley Haworth-Roberts has overlooked science and reason. He links to and quotes people who disagree with the material that Answers in Genesis and the Institute for Creation Research and Cowboy Bob Sorensen have said. He has not shown that anyone is lying. I submit to all that this kind of posting further supports my conclusion that Ashley Haworth-Roberts does not understand science but is attempting to use it as well as denigrate other people for the sole purpose of building up his own ego. Notice that the creationists did not resort to name calling of the secular scientists. Ashley Haworth-Roberts attempts to sway the emotions of people. The Cowboy has proven this many times.



TROLL.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Cowardly Bob

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Feb 23, 2017 12:04 am

viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3735&p=51272&hilit=disturbing#p51272 (my post at 20.02 on 20 Feb from which Sorensen is quote mining)

https://www.facebook.com/pg/Piltdown.Superman/posts/
"An angry atheist made a comment about Christians who threaten his religion of evolutionism [LIAR] with truth, and I grabbed a part that I hope can be a "teachable moment". Maybe Veritas Domain and others want to chime in.
"Reality denial - including science denial - is dangerous to humanity. And when it is done in the name of God it is disturbing."
First, "reality" is being arbitrarily defined as materialism; [LIAR: I was talking about 'David Tee' twisting my words on his website and also denying realities such as natural selection] no God, the Bible is not true, especially Genesis. Second, "reality" is also arbitrarily defined as naturalistic evolution [LIAR: I did not attempt any definition of reality]. Third, this tinhorn has a nasty habit of equivocating "science" with "evolution" [LIAR: I have NEVER 'equivocated' those two terms]. Many of his ilk will pull this bait 'n' switch trick so they can falsely refer to biblical creationists as "science deniers". [Creationists are, to varying degrees, science deniers. FACT] Fourth, to use the biblical principle of answering a fool as his folly deserves (Prov. 26:4-5), what if someone really is a "reality denier", why is doing it in the name of God disturbing? [Because God is supposed to be a God of Truth, moron.] Why should an atheist care? [Because I am not like you.] What in his worldview makes this, or anything else, right or wrong? [A malicious question built on the false premise that if you are not a young earth creationist zealot you have a worldview that lying is acceptable.] He is actually standing on the biblical worldview in order to hate God and Christians. [Sorensen falsely declaring victory, again, whilst running away from all direct interaction and debate with my posts on this forum. Hypocrite and Liar.]
-Cowboy Bob Sorensen"

Bob 'I'm no fascist but the people who disagree with me probably are' Sorensen cannot deal with my scientific rebuttals of all the trash he keeps posted so instead he attacks me behind my back and quotes my words totally devoid of their context in order to set himself up as a 'teacher'. What a disgusting fraud and bigot.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Bob Sorensen - pathologically evil

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Feb 23, 2017 2:16 am

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/#
"Although the atheopath was not named, he identified himself. See the vitriolic, irrational response if you want to see how he dug himself in deeper: [LIAR] http://www.forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewto ... 750#p51295"
"Did you see the non-answers? [LIAR]
Why should an atheist care? [Because I am not like you.] What in his worldview makes this, or anything else, right or wrong? [A malicious question built on the false premise that if you are not a young earth creationist zealot you have a worldview that lying is acceptable.] He is actually standing on the biblical worldview in order to hate God and Christians. [Sorensen falsely declaring victory, again, whilst running away from all direct interaction and debate with my posts on this forum. Hypocrite and Liar.]"

He cannot deal with my refutations of his nonsense on scientific topics. So he plays silly childish games and tries to persuade idiots and fellow bigots that he is a 'teacher'.

"Ashley Haworth-Roberts attempts to sway the emotions of people." (Gordons.) Looks like Sorensen already was given THAT job ...

Photo taken of the latest bigoted and denialist comments. I was going to send a wide circulation email - but all the recipients are already fully informed that Sorensen is a waste of space and this example tells them nothing they did not already know.

Hypocrite Sorensen never adequately answers my questions to him. Such as the question recently asked here "Did I write anything that was incorrect or factually wrong? Yes or No. If 'yes' kindly explain."

I think Sorensen would be well-advised to shut his mouth and start behaving like the Christian he claims to be. But if he persists I WILL send that email.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Hawaiian islands and seamounts

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Feb 23, 2017 3:57 am

In my post at 00.29 hrs on 22 February I quoted information supplied by David Levin in I think 2010 (at Amazon reviews of Jonathan Sarfati's 'The Greatest Hoax on Earth'). However, I think some of the data may have been superseded ie one of the most northwesterly Hawaiian undersea seamounts has been dated as even older than c65 million years.

This article appears more accurate:
http://greatesthoaxonearth.blogspot.co. ... rgent.html

By my calculation, the data fit here is less compelling though certainly interesting. If an island had moved from the Hawaiian hotspot at 7.9 cm per year for 80 million years it should be nearer to 3,900 miles distant than 3,000 miles distant today. (But I am uncertain whether the island in question is exactly 3,000 miles from the hot spot.)

There is abundant convergent evidence here for most if not all of the Hawaiian islands being VERY old. (If they once moved 'catastrophically fast' and radiometric dates are 'wrong', it's interesting that they loosely match with speed of movement and distance from what one assumes is a pretty much stationary hot spot that has been volcanically active throughout the time the islands were formed and then started eroding eventually to disappear below sea level.)

PS
Should I need to send that email I will not comment further here that I have done so [EDIT on 28 February: sorry I changed my mind about THAT - because I was already refuting some nonsense Flood claims that Sorensen was referencing when I discovered that the threatened email was sadly necessary after all - even if four days after the event]. But at the time of writing there is - having checked the Piltdown Superman facebook page again - no need.

PPS
I can hear the winds of 'Storm Doris' starting up outside ...
Last edited by a_haworthroberts on Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Bob Sorensen ignores inconvenient facts and loves hatred

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:07 am

(1)
Sorensen deliberately ignores these facts as posted here (two posts) on 13 February:


"
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/ca ... mic-event/
And he can't even get the Bible right. How could Noah's Flood be a 'mass extinction'? That would have been Noah's Flood without Noah's Ark.
"The charts do provide accurate summaries of the fossil sequence. There is a definite order, from bacteria and sea creatures at the bottom to modern humans at the top";
"From a biblical perspective, the order probably reflects the order in which different environments were buried during the Flood."

How could lots of 'different environments' be in one locality in just a few months or years?! Total and utter garbage. Funny how when you start with the Bible instead of the material evidence (including what we observe in real time today) you end up with such nonsensical garbage. But perhaps if they post the garbage on the birthday of that appalling high priest Darwin the YEC fans of Ham and all his works will lap it up as 'science'...

And he carries on, still trying to appear 'scientific'. Though instead of fully describing his own half-baked 'hypothesis' (lest his readers might see it for the nonsense that it is) he instead starts attacking real science (again).

"The third and largest “extinction” (Permian–Triassic) is right where we would expect the biggest transition in the types of creatures buried: when the destructive waters rose from the ocean floor to begin engulfing the land!
What appears to be a big extinction is just a transition in the height of the Floodwaters, which buried different flora and fauna below and above this level. No wonder we don’t find certain sea creatures after this point—because their environments were completely buried before any land creatures were swept up by the rising water."

Total lies. From so-called Christians. What about all the marine creatures eg ammonites which went extinct, sometimes leaving fossils, either during the Cretaceous or at the K-T/K-Pg boundary following the asteroid/comet impact?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceou ... tion_event
(The liar at AiG mentions trilobites - which went extinct much much earlier - but fails to mention ammonites.)

And the liar indulges in yet more deliberate Bible eisegesis - as a 'rescuing device' for his pseudo-scientific 'hypothesis':
"Clearly, powerful ocean floodwaters were at work to lay down these megasequences. But why are there five?

The Floodwaters reached a zenith during each of these depositional cycles, likely getting higher and higher and higher until the whole earth was flooded as described in Genesis. Between each megasequence cycle, the waters began to retreat. As they again moved rapidly, in some places they eroded some of the sediments they had just deposited and moved them elsewhere. Between each rise and fall cycle, large portions of the continent were above water again. Any animals struggling to swim could have left footprints on the exposed wet surfaces that then hardened. The next brief wave of sediment-laden water would cover and fossilize those footprints.""


"Some trilobites lived in open water and swam around reefs. Most ammonites lived in shallow seas. Thus AiG cannot explain why 'Noah's Flood' killed the former sooner than the latter. Science can. The science AiG claim to 'love'. But their talk of trilobites (but not ammonites which they fail to mention) having their environment 'completely buried' during the 'Permian extinction' stage of 'Noah's Flood' is complete tosh and I suspect they know it. Snelling states: "the fossil record represents different environments full of creatures that lived at the same time but were buried in the order of the Flood’s destruction". But he would like his readers to assume that ammonites lived in a different 'environment' to trilobites. Which is not the case. So he's talking nonsense. But the full quote is "According to the Flood perspective, in contrast, the fossil record represents different environments full of creatures that lived at the same time but were buried in the order of the Flood’s destruction. The Flood buried the last of the trilobites before it reached the dinosaurs on land. The trilobites’ pre-Flood habitats were destroyed and disappeared under rapidly accumulating Flood sediments before dinosaurs and other land animals got buried." Looks like the Flood perspective is total nonsense then. But AiG - and the liar Sorensen and certain other YECs - will carry on banging on that it explains things much better than 'evolutionary' 'science' ...

PS at 3.15 am. The preceding message reproduced an email sent around three hours ago. But I then noticed that I misread a Snelling sentence "No wonder we don’t find certain sea creatures after this point" and thought he was saying "No wonder we don’t find sea creatures after this point". Thus I wrote "total lies" (and the fact is that most sea creatures that fossilise were still alive and well, or yet to evolve, after the Permian extinction). But I would now re-word my comment as "total misdirection". For reasons explained above in the discussion of marine survivors of the Permian extinction such as eg ammonites."


(2)
But never mind about any of THAT Cowboy Bob Sorensen. ALL your followers need to know is that you should deny the reality that Earth has experienced five (or more) mass extinction events during a lengthy pre-history because "Biblical creationists have a far different take on the so-called extinction events. There was actually one very big event: the Genesis Flood. This is supported by scientific evidence, including volcanism, rock layers in megasequences, lots of water moving very quickly, and more."

So don't bother explaining how lots of 'different environments' could be in one locality in just a few months or years. Don't bother explaining exactly how what appears to be a big extinction is merely a 'transition in the height of the Floodwaters which buried different flora and fauna below and above this level'. And don't bother defending the highly misleading claim that although ammonites lasted until the K-T/K-Pg event, when discussing the Permian-Triassic around 185 million years (or a 'few days'/'few weeks') earlier it is perfectly OK to exclaim in defending 'flood geology' "no wonder we don’t find certain sea creatures after this point—because their environments were completely buried before any land creatures were swept up by the rising water". Don't bother to clarify or defend the bald statement in your referenced AiG article that "clearly, powerful ocean floodwaters were at work to lay down these megasequences" (if there have been found to be around five unconformities - between the five megasequences found in North America - how exactly could these unconformities ie erosional surfaces possibly be 'explained' from what the Bible ACTUALLY states in Genesis 6-8). Or do wild claims by AiG about what the flood waters must have somehow done take precedence over what the Bible ACTUALLY records as happening. Such as the wild claim that because "The fossil record often has tracks of animals in lower layers than the fossilized remains of those animals" therefore "This is an enigma to secularists". NO. I don't think so. Perhaps the tracks were made by the animals' ancestors of the same species? (Or if you prefer the fantasy 'answer' offered by YECs: "How could animals make tracks and thousands or even millions of years later their bodies were buried" - the answer is that NOBODY thinks they possibly could have done that but nevertheless the solution to this 'mystery' is that "the tracks and then the bodies were buried in the Flood over mere hours or days".)
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2017/02 ... story.html

And Sorensen is - after no doubt reading my comments of 13 February - still desperately claiming on Facebook:
"Creationary scientists have a better explanation that fits the data".
It's a pity they don't even fit the Bible.

The YEC faith (it's not science it is FAITH and also DENIAL). That ALL species extinctions mysteriously (and unbiblically) must have occurred within the past 4,500 years
(after 'Noah's Flood').


(3)
PS And why do you think no dinosaur fossils have been found at the Grand Canyon (created by Noah's Flood according to standard YEC dogma) Bob? Kindly explain that from the Bible (or some YEC propaganda site if you prefer).


(4)
PPS I've spent the last four days not looking at ANYTHING posted by Sorensen. So I've only now seen the POISON erupting from the mouths of the reality denial zealots Baldwin, Sorensen, Long and Bergman dated 23 February - erupting because I am diligent in dissecting the false claims about 'science' that they post and showing internet browsers that these people cannot be trusted if you care about facts. Poison such as "He's crazy, Bob", " I wasn't kidding about mental illness and demonic influence", "troll boy has done a great deal of spamming people", "biblically and logically, this jasper has been defeated", " I can see from those comments why he hates the God of the Bible so much: it interferes with his own desire to BE God", "I'm showing all y'all this to show (a) what atheism does to the mind; (b) what demonic influence with demonic influence fueled by atheistic hatred does to the mind; (c) although defeated, they do not stop. That's when it's time to walk away, hang up the phone, block the sender, or whatever. The Bible talks about "shutting their mouths", but that's not literal (as we can see). It means that they have no coherent response", "Notice that the egomaniac is never wrong in his own eyes. When caught, it's someone else's fault. His demigod complex includes knowing the thoughts of others, such as email recipients who blocked him. He's a tin plated swaggering dictator wannabe with delusions of godhood", "Poor boy stayed up all night again looking for something to cry about".
https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/#

These people never learn nor have the remotest desire to do so. The more abuse I get the more I know I am doing the right thing. (These people read this page and STILL can ONLY respond to my detailed comments with poison.) And it has never been necessary to lie about them or their words. Just use facts.

I am - as promised - now, reluctantly, sending that email. Entitled 'Fascist YEC wants me to email exposing their evil and their fear of facts'. Just a very brief message inviting recipients to read this post (if they are prepared to consider that it might contain facts rather than 'spam'). (Any who do might also happen on the posts in another thread here that expose 'David Tee' as another serial liar young earth creationist blogger.)

Incidentally my email is also bcc'ed to four Christian friends. I think they would all recognise that I am not remotely anti-Christian nor am I setting myself up as a 'God'.


POSTSCRIPT at 3.31 am (just after sending the email). That part (4) of this post refers back in part to my post above at 2.16 am on 23 February.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Bob Sorensen and co - fake Christians slaves to hate

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:53 am

The fascist liars who invent 'facts' but refuse to answer any questions they don't like (remind you of anyone?) are off again:

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"Hitler-Robbers is furious again. Funny how a guy with no education is an expert in everything."
"Funny when an atheist claims to be an expert in the Bible, which he rejects, and calls people "liars" when he has no moral basis for objecting, even if they were shown to be liars. Since he makes the assertion but does not back it up, once again, this defeated fool (Psaml 53:1) has shown himself to be the liar. Again.
I read an article about tactics that toxic people such as psychopaths and sociopaths use, and many of the items fit him. It may be good source material for a future article on atheopaths. -CBB"

All of which tells us a great deal about THEM. Including that even when you back up claims made against them they always exclaim "you never backed up your claim".

There are no liars in the world. The proof? Every liar will tell you "I'm not a liar". Especially religious liars, political liars and criminal liars.

Sorensen cannot back up his claim "There was actually one very big event: the Genesis Flood. This is supported by scientific evidence, including volcanism, rock layers in megasequences, lots of water moving very quickly, and more." That's because it's a falsehood, a lie. It's not even biblical that 'Noah's Flood' supposedly ebbed and flowed and 'caused' five unconformities between North American megasequences. That is TOTAL fantasy, fake 'facts'.

If Earth is just '6,000' years old, why do you think no dinosaur fossils have been found at the Grand Canyon (created by Noah's Flood according to standard YEC dogma)? Kindly explain that from the Bible (or some YEC propaganda site if you prefer).
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Mar 09, 2017 1:05 am

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"This makes the long-age problem much worse for evolutionists."
Sorensen when referring to dinosaur protein/collagen. Except that there was no such 'long-age problem' in the first place. Unless you are a fact-denying YEC apologist and fanatic. There is however an enormous problem with a '6,000 year old universe and Earth'. (For instance, focussing on this planet which is younger than much of the wider universe): https://ageofrocks.org/100-reasons-the-earth-is-old/
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2017/03 ... m=facebook
"Excuses have been made, such as the "iron as a preservative" concept, which smacks of desperation and illustrates bad science." No. Explanations have been put forward but certain religious bigots are not prepared to consider them impartially but reject them out of hand.

Two examples just today of how BS posts propaganda (otherwise known as BS) and not impartial information.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Bob Sorensen's 'Christian' hate cult/club

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:15 pm

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/ (under his post about what he calls 'trolls' and 'snowflakes')
"Haywire the Criminal Cyberstalker has been ego surfing again. He saw this and left something to polish up and show the world, even though he was not named in the above post:
"'My crime? Lying. But the crime is actually defined as "saying things against evolution and affirming biblical creation that he doesn't want to read". People like this are happy to misrepresent God, creationists, the Bible, and more ...'.
No. Your crime is indeed lying, liar. This is yet another lie from you. I was a Christian. But I was never part of the lying YEC anti-science hateful cult I am pleased to say. The cult that says that as long as we are 'defending scripture' ANYTHING GOES.
[spam link removed]
Lying is wrong because it deceives people. There I answered your gotcha question. Now answer mine. Why do you lie? (Because it is impossible to defend 'historic' Genesis WITHOUT lying.)"
How many fallacies? Let me count the ways...nah, you've seen it before in different forms. And he still did not answer my question, even though it is not a "gotcha" question. Actual Advice Mallard has actual advice: https://www.facebook.com/cowboybobsoren ... =3&theater"
[further fictitious hate comments by him and one of the unholy rabble who 'like' his facebook tirades follow]

BS or Bob Sorensen. The man is a PATHOLOGICAL liar.
THIS, from the same facebook page, is what I was responding to (in a message sent to him privately via one of his blogs, around 22 hours ago):
"Diagnosis of most internet 'trolls' and 'snowflakes'
"Have I therefore now become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?" (Galatians 4:16) From WHY?Outreach
*****
Darwin's Flying Monkeys© go on search and destroy missions to tell Christians and creationists how wrong we are, armed with preconceptions, bad logic, and outdated science. Some get mighty ornery when people stand up to them. They are not motivated by science, but by hate. After all, they could simply smile to themselves about what they consider our foolishness and go on about their business, but that ain't happening.
One atheist hates biblical creation science and me in particular that he wants the God that he doesn't believe in to create Hell so I will be put there. My crime? Lying. But the crime is actually defined as "saying things against evolution and affirming biblical creation that he doesn't want to read". People like this are happy to misrepresent God, creationists, the Bible, and more...".

That final paragraph was undeniably attacking me - with FOUR lies - regardless of whether I was named (he knows that I know that he was referring to me).
My reply read in full as follows:
"
https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"My crime? Lying. But the crime is actually defined as "saying things against evolution and affirming biblical creation that he doesn't want to read". People like this are happy to misrepresent God, creationists, the Bible, and more ...".
No. Your crime is indeed lying, liar. This is yet another lie from you. I was a Christian. But I was never part of the lying YEC anti-science hateful cult I am pleased to say. The cult that says that as long as we are 'defending scripture' ANYTHING GOES.
http://forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic. ... &start=750
Lying is wrong because it deceives people. There I answered your gotcha question. Now answer mine. Why do you lie? (Because it is impossible to defend 'historic' Genesis WITHOUT lying.)"

Now he is falsely accusing me - on his other facebook page that he links to - of doubling my "bone-headed-ness" because I responded to his latest lying comments that were definitely about me. He is playing a lying game. The game that "because I didn't name you I wasn't talking about you!". Who else was he talking about in the sentences I quoted? Total BS.

Why does Sorensen lie all the time? Because you cannot defend 'historic' Genesis without lies. Like other YECs almost without exception. But also because he is a moron and a bigot (and I seriously doubt that he is a saved Christian assuming that the Christian God exists and 'saves' repentant sinners trusting in Jesus).

I answered your question you PATHOLOGICAL liar. You don't like the answer so you pretend that I did not answer. I answered you. And you are once again proving yourself to be a PATHOLOGICAL liar.

You by contrast IGNORED my question enquiring WHY you lie. (But I already know the answer to that.)


And Sorensen's rabble are also fulminating (and distorting my position either through ignorance or through malice) under his separate facebook post about dinosaur blood. After he railed:
"Regarding a similar post, I was railed at:
Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed
"This makes the long-age problem much worse for evolutionists."
Sorensen when referring to dinosaur protein/collagen. Except that there was no such 'long-age problem' in the first place. Unless you ar a fact-denying YEC apologist and fanatic. There is however an enormous problem with a '6,000 year old universe and Earth'. (For instance, focussing on this planet which is younger than much of the wider universe):[anti-creationist propaganda redacted]
[Quoting from my site]
"Excuses have been made, such as the "iron as a preservative" concept, which smacks of desperation and illustrates bad science." No. Explanations have been put forward but certain religious bigots are not prepared to consider them impartially but reject them out of hand.
Two examples just today of how BS posts propaganda (otherwise known as BS) and not impartial information.
Ummmm...and he's impartial and unbiased, right? No, atheopaths go into full denial mode, I've seen this sort of thing many times. -CBB"

I never claimed total lack of bias. I'm biased in favour of evidence, reality and facts when it comes to doing science. (He is biased against those things.)

And he can't handle the link I posted - posted here - so he feels compelled to 'redact' it. Funny.

The rabble accuse me of 'ignoring' evidence. I did NOT. I am aware that dinosaur collagen has been found. I am also aware that Sorensen ignores evidence and explanations pointing to an ancient not 'young' Earth - he arrogantly dismisses explanations by real scientists as 'excuses' and redacts links to websites giving scientific reasons why Earth is ancient*. The bunch of liars also accuse me of being a 'science denier'. Which is rich coming from proven science haters who lie and falsely accuse on a daily basis (and censor ALL dissent). And of being a 'leftist' (I am anti the extreme right wing not a 'leftist' since you ask.)

These people should take a long hard look at themselves. Since they call themselves 'Christian' in public.


* Correction at 9.40 pm. He 'redacted' a link to this site. (I sent him a separate message, which he has not acknowledged, about other claims he was making yesterday about tree rings 'not' disproving a 6,000 year old Earth or global flood 4,500 years ago - I included a number of links, one of which was this one:
https://ageofrocks.org/100-reasons-the-earth-is-old/)
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Email as just sent

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:52 pm

More musings from a YEC who is extreme even by their standards.

I've not been either in hospital or on holiday but I have not ventured into Sorensen Land for nearly ten days.

This is the kind of tosh I have been missing:
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2017/03 ... ebate.html
He is referencing this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPLRhVdNp5M
Sorensen has never ever had a good word to say about Bill Nye as far as I am aware and he has repeatedly since 2014 made false and malicious allegations against Nye's words at the big debate with Ken Ham in February 2014 (that would not have been necessary had Nye lost the debate). According to Sorensen now, "Ham would attempt to explain things many times, and Nye was not willing to listen". Having listened twice to the whole film of the interactions on 8 July 2016, I can confirm that the converse is of course equally true and probably more so. Nye has never claimed to 'love religion' but Ham - who would not listen to Nye - has repeatedly claimed to 'love science'.

Sorensen also whinges:
"My impression is that from the get-go, it was easy to see that Bill Nye was fastuous, on the prod, and looking to score points in a "Gotcha!" game against Ken Ham by giving him a verbal slap down."
Nye did not invite himself to the Ark Encounter. Ham invited him! But Bob appears to resent free speech for anyone who is (a) not a card carrying young earth creationist or (b) is passionate about scientific evidence and scientific progress.

Sorensen continues:
"Nye is opposed to teaching children about creation science, calling it "indoctrination"."
Nye is correct. It IS indoctrination. My new post here provides evidence of how YECs seek to indoctrinate (nor for religion like many Christians do which is fine, but against science):
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3801

Instead of analysing what Nye said in detail, Sorensen spends most of his blog accusing Nye of 'elephant hurling', 'red herrings', 'argument from incredulity', 'poisoning the well', 'circumstantial ad hominems' and 'genetic fallacy' - and of being 'arrogant' and 'condescending'. Ad hominems. The very thing Sorensen claims to detest.

Alternative comments to Sorensen's on the same 2016 'debate' are available here:
https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2017/0 ... qus_thread

As for Ken Ham, he is a rather dangerous distorter of political as well as scientific reality:
https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken- ... fake-news/
"The left-wing, secular media is doing to President Trump what they’ve done to us for years—spreading false accusations, lies, and misinformation; being engaged in censorship; and more. Notice how the left, that’s falsely accused Christians of intolerance for years, are some of the most intolerant people on the planet. The left-wing media and protestors say they want free speech, as long as it’s their own speech and their own views—they want to censor real free speech."
(Ham claims, possibly with justification, that some journalists/'leftists'/'secularists'/atheists have made inaccurate claims about the funding of his Ark Encounter ergo - by his twisted reasoning - this is all 'fake news' and therefore the source of fake news is 'not' the Trump mafia but instead its media and political critics who are all horrible 'leftists' and 'secularists' - because they are not of the far right like Ham is.)
More here:
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.co ... fake-news/

Meanwhile we get this from Ham on his facebook page - it's very revealing:
"We're raising up an army of kids in Georgia to defend the Christian faith against the secular-humanist religious zealots who want to capture them. When students are taught to think critically, as I did with thousands of kids in Atlanta on Monday, they recognize evolution is a fairy tale".
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Email as just sent

Postby MisterGordons » Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:12 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:Instead of analysing what Nye said in detail, Sorensen spends most of his blog accusing Nye of 'elephant hurling', 'red herrings', 'argument from incredulity', 'poisoning the well', 'circumstantial ad hominems' and 'genetic fallacy' - and of being 'arrogant' and 'condescending'. Ad hominems. The very thing Sorensen claims to detest.


The Cowboy supported his claims and it is not his fault that Ashley Haworth-Roberts consistently demonstrates his lack of logic.

a_haworthroberts wrote:Alternative comments to Sorensen's on the same 2016 'debate' are available here:
https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2017/0 ... qus_thread


I left a comment there and was censored.

It appears that Ashley Haworth-Roberts shall no longer be receiving the attention he craves from the Cowboy. https://www.facebook.com/notes/the-ques ... 9111068959
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

Re: Email as just sent

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:13 am

MisterGordons wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:Instead of analysing what Nye said in detail, Sorensen spends most of his blog accusing Nye of 'elephant hurling', 'red herrings', 'argument from incredulity', 'poisoning the well', 'circumstantial ad hominems' and 'genetic fallacy' - and of being 'arrogant' and 'condescending'. Ad hominems. The very thing Sorensen claims to detest.


The Cowboy supported his claims and it is not his fault that Ashley Haworth-Roberts consistently demonstrates his lack of logic.

a_haworthroberts wrote:Alternative comments to Sorensen's on the same 2016 'debate' are available here:
https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2017/0 ... qus_thread


I left a comment there and was censored.

It appears that Ashley Haworth-Roberts shall no longer be receiving the attention he craves from the Cowboy. https://www.facebook.com/notes/the-ques ... 9111068959



I'm receiving attention from a Sorensen surrogate and troll. (Unlike Sorensen I can manage fine without surrogates trolling for me.) Perhaps Gordons would care to inform us HERE what he wrote at Panda's Thumb?

And thank you enormously for flagging this further Sorensen hate page - which until tonight I was UNAWARE of:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/the-ques ... 9111068959
"I shouldn't give a particular attention-craving stalker what he desires, but on the other hand, he gives me such excellent examples of bad logic, irrational hatred, and mental illness exacerbated by demonic oppression; don't let your friends become narcissistic atheopaths. I’m not the only one he hates and stalks in his Darwinist jihad against biblical creationists."
"The irony that he continually proves me right (usually through quote mining and misrepresentation) is lost on him." No - I have proven him to be pathologically dishonest.
He then attempts - behind my back rather to my face - to deal with a recent email I sent highlighting several of his most recent propaganda blog posts (email sent on 13 March and then reproduced by me as a comment under one of his blogs because he tells me he blocks any email I might try to send to him about his blogs - which activity happens because I am BANNED from commenting openly at ANY of his web pages).
He asks indignantly "where are the alleged lies?". HERE: "atheists and other anti-creationists seek to protect their cult of death from scrutiny, so they unleash Darwin's Flying Monkeys" (nobody has 'unleashed' me and I am not part of any organised anti-Bob conspiracy; also like other real science, evolutionary science thrives on scrutiny); "Remember that debate with Ken Ham where Nye basically made a fool of himself with outdated science and bad logic".
He then accuses me of 'logical fallacies' (which is his pseudo-intellectual dodge that is used time and again to save him from EVER addressing the SUBSTANCE of my posts - including where I alluded to the Christian Today poll of February 2014 which suggested that 92% of those who watched thought Nye beat Ham in their 2014 'first', and properly moderated, debate).
And this is his 'proof' (while this whole thread is MY proof that HE is a liar):
https://www.facebook.com/pg/cowboybobso ... 5301183034
I also note that he appears to hate Bill Nye more than me. Though I'm a little surprised at that I can understand why he hates Bill Nye so much. He made a fool of Ken Ham. Twice.

Bob Sorensen is evil.

And young earth creationism is not Christian. It is a hate cult devoted to lying about science in order to 'prove' the infallibility of the book of Genesis (because otherwise people might think that NONE of the Bible is infallible - even the obviously religious parts such as the whole New Testament). The YEC movement hates any and all criticism.

[Minor edits made to this post. Now final at 12.26 am GMT.]
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8062
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron