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 - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon May 13, 2013 2:17 am

Cowboy Bob also flagged this at TQEP Facebook page:
http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2012/03 ... arwin.html
It links to this:
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2012 ... orting-id/

I've not listened to the podcast but it seems Eugenie Scott misspoke in the video exchange, as the 2004 Meyer paper in Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington did fleetingly mention Intelligent Design.

However, despite that, the situation is not as clear-cut as the YECs and ID proponents would wish to pretend. There is a question mark as to whether the paper was properly peer-reviewed in the first place (by Richard Sternberg alone) before publication. Also, it was subsequently retracted by the journal (before the 2005 Abrams exchanges in the video).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_C. ... ent_design
http://web.archive.org/web/200709262145 ... ement.html

Had he been asked for an example of the BCSE 'dishonesty' he also claimed, I wonder what Bob would have come up with. Nothing written by me I trust.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8704
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon May 13, 2013 11:14 pm

Email as just sent:


"Blogger Cowboy Bob Sorensen

http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2013/05 ... arian.html
Tas Walker's propaganda is for people like you, Bob. Who know
virtually nothing about science.

You babble emptily about geologists obtaining 'greatly improved
results' if they would just reject their models in favour of so-called
'biblical Noachian Flood models' - but you seem not to have noticed
that rather do such here Tas Walker has instead misrepresented the main
conclusion these scientists reached, in order to pretend that they
'agree' with or 'confirm' part of so-called young Earth creationist
Flood Geology. I suggest you re-read the post if you do not believe me.
More details here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2970&start=495

I tried to comment on all this under Tas' blog but he is refusing
either to publish or to try to refute my would-be comment. I can guess
why."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8704
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - LIAR FOR JESUS

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon May 13, 2013 11:35 pm

And another - sadly necessary - email (I should have checked TQEP page at Facebook first):


"Just seen that arrogant, pathetic, Bob and his intolerant friends are
lying about me 'behind my back' today on his Facebook page - once
again.
https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman

"Yes, this troll is on my block list but he still announces that he
sends me UNWANTED e-mail. That qualifies as spam. I think he has an
unnatural fixation on both Jason and me. He cannot logically or
scientifically refute what we say or what we stand for, but his
obsessive hatred and attempts to demonize only make him look more the
fool every day. Quote like the ones you submitted illustrate this, much
to the amusement of my friends. ~CBB"

I DO understand science, Bob. It is abundantly clear however, Bob,
that you do NOT.

Thus you resort to abuse and false allegations. As for Jason he RAN
away from debate HERE, on 28.3.13:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3220&start=30

Everything I wrote about Jason Lisle was TRUE as well. I emailed you
photographic confirmation, so I suggest that you should not try to deny
it.

Like every YEC I have encountered over the internet, you hate FACTS.
You all lie - and then defend each other and accuse your opponents of
being the liars.

I will however try to keep supplying you with facts to counter your
lies.

Bob seems to think that hatred of lies makes me a liar. And he
suggests that I cannot 'logically' refute him!

He knows that I can and I have. On the BCSE community forum:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3153&start=300
"
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8704
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - LIAR FOR JESUS

Postby InfernalTank » Wed May 15, 2013 1:37 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:And another - sadly necessary - email (I should have checked TQEP page at Facebook first):
I DO understand science, Bob. It is abundantly clear however, Bob,
that you do NOT.
"


Basically all he can do is call you names and try to get shock to debate others.
InfernalTank
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed May 01, 2013 1:51 am

YEC Bob Sorensen - RANTING FOR JESUS

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed May 15, 2013 7:27 pm

http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2013/05 ... nists.html
Bob is whinging about various people - the section under the second image is all about me. I guess he is sore because I have exposed his lack of understanding of science - he saw nothing wrong with the Tas Walker blog dated 11 May that Walker has just corrected following my comments (see my most recent posts at the '6,000 year' thread). And - like any closed-minded ideologues - whenever I confront him by email with facts or scientific challenges in response to his blogs, he chooses to label my comments as "unwanted opinions". I'm sure that the facts I present, and which Sorensen NEVER engages with, are most 'unwanted'. I note however that Sorensen has NOTHING new to try and use against me. He's just regurgitating one of his old rants against me - which I have already dealt with earlier on this thread. His tactics to try and get rid of me will not work - that is, if he continues to lie about science or about me online (where he does not permit me to comment).

I will of course inform scientist David Levin of his 'honourable mention' in this blog rant - as I am sure that Mr Sorensen has not already done so.


PS
I have also noticed that 'Mister Gordons' - who occasionally posts barbed comments here - rarely if EVER posts anything under that name at Sorensen's The Question Evolution Project Facebook page (though he has posted at Jason Petersen's blog I think).
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8704
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed May 15, 2013 7:51 pm

PPS
The latest Mister Gordons comment was in fact at the PETERSEN thread.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8704
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby delevin » Wed May 15, 2013 11:30 pm

Ashley,

I rather like Sorensen's rant. Especially the part where he equates evolutionary theory to phlogiston theory of the 17th century, completely missing the facts that 1) YEC could be likened to phlogiston for its lack of supporting evidence and 2) that both phlogiston and YEC were abandoned by the scientific community hundreds of years ago.
delevin
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 8:14 pm

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed May 15, 2013 11:48 pm

Whether he realises this or not, Bob's real opinion appears to be that young Earth creationism is UNFALSIFIABLE.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8704
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby delevin » Wed May 15, 2013 11:54 pm

Bob's opinion is irrelevant to either the conduct of science or the appreciation of reality.
delevin
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 8:14 pm

YEC Issac Bourne - WHY?

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu May 16, 2013 4:36 pm

Why does he blog and ask questions when he normally censors any replies he receives?
http://yecheadquarters.org/?p=1579
Is he an egotist who wants people to assume "I've asked 'killer questions' than nobody has an answer to"?
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8704
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - LIAR FOR JESUS

Postby MisterGordons » Fri May 17, 2013 5:08 pm

InfernalTank wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:And another - sadly necessary - email (I should have checked TQEP page at Facebook first):
I DO understand science, Bob. It is abundantly clear however, Bob,
that you do NOT.
"


Basically all he can do is call you names and try to get shock to debate others.


How do you know that?
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - RANTING FOR JESUS

Postby MisterGordons » Fri May 17, 2013 5:10 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:I have also noticed that 'Mister Gordons' - who occasionally posts barbed comments here - rarely if EVER posts anything under that name at Sorensen's The Question Evolution Project Facebook page (though he has posted at Jason Petersen's blog I think).


I can see why people look up to you in admiration, you have a remarkable talent that should be applauded on the BBC Home Service. Leaving out irrelevant material such as my posting under other names so I do not join your stalking list is sheer genius.
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby MisterGordons » Fri May 17, 2013 5:12 pm

delevin wrote:Ashley,

I rather like Sorensen's rant. Especially the part where he equates evolutionary theory to phlogiston theory of the 17th century, completely missing the facts that 1) YEC could be likened to phlogiston for its lack of supporting evidence and 2) that both phlogiston and YEC were abandoned by the scientific community hundreds of years ago.


Didn't quite catch on, did you? That's all right, you're perfectly suited to be here on the Ashley Ego Programme.
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

Re: YEC Issac Bourne - WHY?

Postby MisterGordons » Fri May 17, 2013 5:12 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:Why does he blog and ask questions when he normally censors any replies he receives?
http://yecheadquarters.org/?p=1579
Is he an egotist who wants people to assume "I've asked 'killer questions' than nobody has an answer to"?


I think you're making that up.
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

Re: YEC Bob Sorensen - timeline

Postby MisterGordons » Fri May 17, 2013 5:13 pm

delevin wrote:Bob's opinion is irrelevant to either the conduct of science or the appreciation of reality.

Can you prove that? Your opinion is not 'science' you know.
MisterGordons
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:20 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 6 guests

cron