Surveying the Lab Rats

From Creation Evolution Headlines

A paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences illustrates the deep problem among Darwin-inebrieted psychologists: they don’t see their own fallacies. In this paper, nine secular psychologists, including Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, whom we saw promoting deadly sins (2/12/17) and scratching their heads trying to evolve generosity by natural selection (7/27/11), are confused about why ordinary people (unlike the elitists they are), don’t favor the redistribution of wealth. They decided to survey the lab rats (i.e., the public) and find out why. So in “Support for redistribution is shaped by compassion, envy, and self-interest, but not a taste for fairness,” they explain the factors they judge to be most significant for affecting public attitudes for or against redistribution of wealth (a politically-correct term for communism). A subtext of the paper is that people should favor redistribution because it is more fair. That’s all we need in 2017: more communism.

So what’s the logical fallacy here? To find out, have these well-paid scientists go live in a communist country, like Cuba or Venezuela, and see if they could protect their own money from redistribution, or have the freedom to speak their minds in print.

[After noting the life of a scientist in the gulag.] t’s nice for Nature to give voice to “Science lessons from the Gulag” today, but back then, most scientific institutions lionized Stalin as a great leader, and were vocal critics of the free countries that allowed them to voice their opinions.

Too much visionary, superior abstractions.

Not enough interest in real-life applications of their beautiful theories.

Let’s see the logical fallacy here. In two other papers about evolution in education, students are treated like lab rats who need some nudging (6/11/17). A paper in a journal called Evolution: Education and Outreach (odd name for a “science” journal, is it not?), a team considers “A multifactorial analysis of acceptance of evolution.” Lack of acceptance of evolution is a serious problem, in their view. Maybe with a little scientific manipulation, elitists can find ways to overcome the reluctance of the lab rats to run the maze properly:

Naturally, the inferior rats pay to build and run their own rat mazes. And they love to do so, with FREE EDUCATION and the welfare state as the cheese.

But, with the destruction of the rats (via abortion), their sterilization (via attitude), and the immigration of new rats who — being more resistant to the Masters — are reproducing quite nicely (while providing precious little taxes), the Game of Masters and Mazes is drawing to an end.

In another paper in Evolution: Education and Outreach, Bertha Vasquez publishes “A state-by-state comparison of middle school science standards on evolution in the United States.” Surely she would favor what Charles Darwin advised, wouldn’t she? “A fair result can only come,” he said in The Origin of Species, “from fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of every question” (Academic Freedom Day). Anyone who thinks she should hasn’t smelled the mind-numbing power of Darwin DOPE. Like Stalinist-Leninists, the Darwin Party faithful only support academic freedom until they gain power. After that, all must follow the Party Line (5/21/17).

The Masters are the Masters… until the money runs out.

The money is running out now, as the enemies of God refuse to count the cost: after all, Jesus said we should do that, and Darwinists have no interest in obeying God.

Better to chase delusions, of stones into bread… as Satan promised.

(“Don’t they know that Satan is a liar?
“Sure… but so long as it feels good, they don’t care.”)

You should have an interest in obeying Jesus… assuming that you want to prosper, without cheating or lying or scamming or reaching for a gun (with or without a badge and a uniform).

We’ve reported frequently in recent years about the lack of ethics in institutional science: fraud, conflict of interest, and the reproducibility crisis have been big news. Yet it should be obvious that without ethics, one cannot have science. If peer review is to catch fraud, what if the reviewers are dishonest? Who watches the watchers? The need for real, reliable ethics is self-evident. Darwinians know this deep down; when discussing three-parent babies through genetic engineering, for instance, New Scientist preached a sermonette, “Nice science, but don’t forget about the ethics.” These are staunch Darwinians, mind you. On the one hand, the editors speak of “the state of scientific knowledge and society’s ethical priorities” as if the latter are malleable. But on the other hand, they conclude that certain policies “would be both unwise and unethical,” as if their opinions are based on absolutes that can be established with certainty.

The desire to eat your cake and still have it is widespread in the very best circles.

What is going to happen is, “No cake.”

Who is the fittest of them all?

One more non-Darwinian paper commands attention: In PNAS, it’s titled, “On the promotion of human flourishing.”  Without any appeals to game theory, evolution or selection, Tyler J. VanderWeele, a Harvard social scientist, analyzes the evidence-based factors that produce robust societies of individuals able to pursue happiness. Here’s his approach:

Many empirical studies throughout the social and biomedical sciences focus only on very narrow outcomes such as income, or a single specific disease state, or a measure of positive affect. Human well-being or flourishing, however, consists in a much broader range of states and outcomes, certainly including mental and physical health, but also encompassing happiness and life satisfaction, meaning and purpose, character and virtue, and close social relationships. The empirical literature from longitudinal, experimental, and quasiexperimental studies is reviewed in attempt to identify major determinants of human flourishing, broadly conceived. Measures of human flourishing are proposed. Discussion is given to the implications of a broader conception of human flourishing, and of the research reviewed, for policy, and for future research in the biomedical and social sciences.

What a radical idea: people can be happy without high incomes! Virtue and character can matter more than money. Meaning and purpose in life can promote human fulfillment. So taking a broader approach for his empirical study, what does he find as the greatest factors contributing to human flourishing?

If it is the case that the family, work, education, and religious community are important determinants of various aspects of human flourishing, as indeed they seem to be, then this has profound implications for societal organization and resource allocation. If we desire societal good, broadly construed as human flourishing, and crudely represented by the measures described above, then the structures, policies, laws, and incentives, financial or otherwise, that contribute to family, work, education, and religious community will likely be important ways in which society itself can better flourish.

Quiz question: who in society are the most pro-family, pro-work people in favor of character and virtue? Darwinists? Ha! There isn’t a perversion known that they don’t justify (see our book review of How Darwinism Corrodes Morality). It’s the churches who build constructive, virtuous families—specifically the religious groups who aren’t taught that blowing up buses and buildings will earn sex favors in the afterlife. It’s the churches who believe in a holy God who demands holy behavior. It’s the organizations like Family Research Council and the American Family Association that promote traditional marriage, church attendance, and community involvement in altruistic good deeds. It’s parents who train up a child in the way he or she should go, and to avoid temptations to self-gratification for higher purposes and goals. VanderWeele admits, “there is now fairly good evidence that participation in religious community is longitudinally associated with the various domains of flourishing,” including better health, lower rates of depression and suicide, more happiness and life satisfaction, more virtuous living and prosocial behavior.

So if Darwinians believe fitness drives evolution, let them consider which humans are the most fit. If they are really in favor of human flourishing (a synonym for fitness), let them abandon the worldview that corrodes morality and embrace the one that promotes it. Let them become ex-Darwinists! Let them bow before their Maker and say, like Paul when he was caught on the wrong path, “Who are you, Lord?” followed by, “Lord, what will you have me to do?” (Acts 9).

The entire point of Darwinism is to find an excuse to avoid bowing to God.

Much better to bow to the State, the Race, the Party, the People, the Leader, since they are all human/human constructs, and thus they can be controlled by men (or even embodied by men, in the case of the Leader).

But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me loved eath. — Proverbs 8:36

Certainly, this culture loves death. Fortunately, there is no reason why God’s people need die with these evil fools.

Physics, Darwin, and England

From Classical Creation Physicists Still Make News

Lord Kelvin

William Thomson, a.k.a. Lord Kelvin, the eminent physicist of Glasgow who dominated physical science in Victorian Britain, was a strong Christian. He gave Darwin a hard time — not with quotes from the Bible, but rather from laws of physics. Much of Lord Kelvin’s work on thermodynamics, communications and energy theory survives (e.g., the Kelvin Scale). Although some of his theories were discarded or revised, one of his speculative ideas about atoms has been ‘resurrected’ by cutting-edge physicists at the University of Durham in the UK.


James Clerk Maxwell

Without controversy, Maxwell’s Equations continue to bear fruit in many fields of electromagnetics and electrical engineering. James Clerk Maxwell was another strong Bible-believing Christian all of his life, even through the Darwinian revolution. One of his insights about statistical thermodynamics has generated controversy to the present day. Called ‘Maxwell’s Demon’ (not his term), this idea proposes a way to overcome the law of entropy. Some entity, whether a conscious being (the ‘demon’) or some automaton, could selectively separate hot and cold molecules into separate compartments, he reasoned, thus overcoming the second law of thermodynamics. Proof that this was not idle speculation rendered obsolete by quantum mechanics can be seen by a recent paper in PNAS titled, “Observing a quantum Maxwell demon at work.” So important is the concept, the researchers state, “Maxwell’s demon plays a central role in thermodynamics of quantum information, yet a full experimental characterization is still missing in the quantum regime.


Sir Isaac Newton

The most famous scientist in history, Sir Isaac Newton, whose Principia launched the scientific revolution, is not a has-been after Einstein. In fact, his name keeps coming up in discussions of one of the biggest controversies of cosmology: Does dark matter exist? Now that repeated tests have failed to identify any substance, theoretical or actual, that could account for the motions of spiral galaxies and galaxy clusters, some physicists are looking to “Modified Newtonian Dynamics” (MOND) for help. One such example giving serious consideration to MOND can be found at Live Science, which mentions Newton eight times in a piece, “Is Dark Matter Real?”. The details of these debates need not concern us here; suffice it to say that there are discussions of ‘modifying’ Newtonian dynamics, not rejecting them, as some teachers seem prone to do with Newton’s theories in the age of Einstein. Students of science may not know that Isaac Newton wrote more about the Bible than he did about science.

It’s worth remembering often that not all scientists are atheists, Darwinists, and materialists. In fact, many of the greatest scientists of all time, including founders of major fields of science, were at least theists if not Bible believers and creationists (see our list of biographies). Many still are today. The Darwinians are like the Marxist-Stalinist-Leninists who took over Russia, kicked out (or killed or imprisoned) everyone who opposed them, and presented themselves as the “saviors” of Russia. Don’t fall for the big lie. The insights of Newton, Kelvin and Maxwell sprang from minds devoted to God and His word, and one mark of a great scientific mind is the ability to produce ideas with staying power. But doesn’t Darwinism have staying power? Yes—by force (6/08/17). If Darwinism had to stand up to free debate, it would collapse like Lysenko’s fake science supported by Lenin, Stalin and Mao.

Read our biographies and decide who had the best ideas with lasting impact. Much of cutting edge-science continues to build on their foundations. Conversely, much of the worst science comes from materialists (6/05/17, 5/19/17). You can’t get much good science out of evolved monkey brains mutating by chance (7/11/17).

The blogger is too kind: the reason why Darwin was victorious was that the solid majority of clerics backed it (in Britain, and then in the Western World) even as most of the scientists of the era challenged it. Couple the church’s support with the pleasing narcissism of the Master Race and the free hand atheism gives to the power-worshipers (generally intellectuals), and you get the moral disaster of today, promptly followed by the death of (Western) Europe.

Take these Christians in England, for example, who feel so marginalized in their own country.

Perhaps they don’t care to notice, but in God’s universe, you reap what you sow. From having the Queen as the head of their church (instead of Christ), to their continuous justification of whatever the people in power want – or a selective silence – they have bent over backwards to support the Power Elite… and not Christ.

(The proper example probably is the secession over the divorce of Henry VIII… or perhaps the implicit atheism of William of Occam… but my fave is having Darwin – a member of a God-despising clerical family, by the way – being buried in Church land. “Who cares about sacrilege? Social positioning is far more important!”)

The Darwinians well understood their marks.

And there the English Christians stand, aliens in their own country (…which they gave away long ago, in return for welfare benefits and Elite approval…), stunned at being betrayed.

I believe that they are merely being paid back for how contemptuously they choose to treat God and His Law. After all, someone is voting Conservative... and, from land/money/life-stealing empires to legalized abortions to the suicidal pleasures of sodomy, we certainly know the history of Conservative politics, now don’t we.

Or, put in another way,

Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. — Matthew 5:13

Tell me when they repent, and I will tell you when they can get their country back again – or, more likely, some shrunken and pathetic remnant of it.

I won’t be holding my breath for even a shred of repentance, by the way. More bleating and whining and bawling is what’s on the menu.

Far wiser for Christian missionaries to wait until the bankruptcy of the local nation-state, and then move in – focusing on Arabs, Indians, and other people who have children, and so, will naturally inherit the land.

The Fall of the Welfare-State

North spells out in The Repudiation of the Welfare State that when the government goes bankrupt, it loses legitimacy, and a new order rises up in it’s place.

This has been true throughout history, with the bankruptcy of Spain in many times in the past, the current death throes of Venezuela, the earlier collapses of Wiemar Germany and the Soviet Union, and the bankruptcy of the British Empire and Ancient Regime France.

So it will be in the coming decades, when the pointedly anti-Christian welfare states of Europe and North America go bust, destroying the lives, plans, and financial security of millions.

This will definitely include the end of the badly managed government-run medical system. Our Darwinian-Secularistic culture, supposedly atheistic, sees the State as both Saviour and Healer (as well as Lawgiver, and thus the functional Lord and God of all), and so demands that the government controls and provides all health care… which must be free/very low cost, as a sign of its Divinity and Right to Rule.

All that is going to go up in smoke.

The fall of the idols is coming.

Will the Church step up to the plate, and exalt Christ and His Law up to its proper place in society?

I pray that the Church moves to expand the Kingdom of God, as she is commanded to do!

Why Men Go to Hell

The following are a few excerpts from North’s The Pressing Need For Revival

God calls His people back to Him in two ways: revival or judgment. In the days of Josiah and Hezekiah, it was revival. In the days of Zedekiah, it was judgment. But He always calls His people back.

I am confident that it will be judgement in our era: and the solid majority of those called back will be in the Third World, not the First. Regardless of the level of punishment God inflicts on the West, repentance will not happen in Western Europe… and will be hard, slow, and painful in America.

Ergo, America will be diminished, especially over the next 50 years… and Europe’s people and culture will be replaced, as a new African people (Arab and Black) moved in to the depopulated zones.

I have hope for Americans, Black and White: I believe that a sufficient amount of pain over several decades will turn things around. There is no hope for Western Europe, though.

Below is the reason for my skepticism of revival as an instrument (at this time) in bringing people from the road to hell, to the road to heaven:

The problem with revival in our era–indeed, going back to the 1730’s–is that revival has been viewed by its practitioners and advocates as a narrow experience of the soul, rather than the foundation of a total reconstruction of the social order. Revival has been understood as personal rather than covenantal. It has been seen as a way of lifting men’s spirits rather than tearing down Satan’s earthly strongholds. It has seen the conflict between Satan and God as a war for the souls of men rather than the war for all creation. It has ignored the dominion covenant (Gen. 1:27-28). It has sought to subdue men’s souls to God without calling men to subdue the earth to the glory of God. It has called the gardeners out of their gardens rather than equipping them for better service in their gardens.

All revivals, at least in America and Europe, fail. The stick is far more effective in these nations than carrots are, so the stick – actually, lead pipes, so far as both the economy and population is concerned – is what we will get.

In the old days, God sent fire from heaven and invading armies to destroy His enemies. Now, debt and abortion, perversion and delusion, do most of the heavy lifting.

(Yeah, yeah, I know about the Muslim immigration crisis: a crisis that simply would not have occurred, if millions upon millions of White European children were born instead of killed by their parents.

We reap what we sow.)

Comprehensive Redemption

The question we must ask ourselves is this: Is there any neutrality? If our answer is no, there can be no neutral territory between God and Satan, that men must serve God or mammon, then we logically must come to a crucial conclusion: redemption is comprehensive. When God calls men to repent–to turn around–He means for them to turn around from sin in every area of life.

This is surprisingly difficult.

It is not that sinners are sinners only in a few narrow areas of their lives. Men are not going to hell because they are off God’s path in one or two key areas. It is not that they drink too much booze, or listen to too much rock music, or attend too many R-rated movies (rated R because of sex, of course, not violence), or sleep late on Sunday morning and then watch pro football games, rather than get up earlier to go to church Sunday morning, and then watch pro football games in the afternoon, the way Christians do. They are going to hell because they are not covenanted with God, who calls them to restructure the whole of their lives.

And so finally, we get to the point of this post.

If it was just a matter of a token sacrifice, offering a Sinner’s Prayer, or doing some other ritual to satisfy God – and then, after buying Him off, going out to do what you please, then all could be ‘saved’… while still holding on to their sin and corruption.

But that is not what salvation means. God demands an end to evil in all of our lives, and all of our thoughts, right into the core of our heart and our bones. Token sacrifices, magic words, rituals and ceremony… this does not cut it with a Lord who wants to see Holiness, Justice, Mercy, and Righteousness pervade and shape and dominate our entire being.

Calvinists have always had the greatest trouble with the fifth point of Calvinism, sometimes called “limited atonement,” and sometimes called “particular redemption.” The critics are correct; both phrases are misleading. There is nothing limited about Christ’s atonement. He redeems everything that man touches. He preserves the life of sinners as well as saints. Paul writes: “. . . we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those who believe” (l Tim. 4:10b).

We should therefore speak of special atonement or special redemption, and contrast it with general atonement or general redemption. Christ died that all men might have physical life and blessings. This is common grace. But He also died specially for those whom He has chosen to be His people. This is special grace. But special grace must be understood in terms of total redemption. He bought back the whole world. He took the whole world out from under the comprehensive curse of God. Now He assigns to His people the dominion task of progressively buying back this world, in time and on earth, day by day, righteous act by righteous act, successful venture after successful venture, discovery after discovery, until the whole world is delivered up by Christ to His Father. “And when all things shall be subdued by him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all” (I Cor. 15:28).

Jesus Christ is in effect a senior military commander who operates under the chief civil magistrate. He has been assigned the task of dominion, as the Second Adam, to achieve what the first Adam could not achieve in sin. He has the task of subduing everything to God the Father. He must first subdue us, His people, and then place us in charge of our respective territories. From top to bottom, from Christ to new recruits (converts), there is a chain of command, a court of appeals, and a program of conquest. He has assembled an army. This army must complete its assignment before it is disbanded, and we all become civilians again.

That is going to be a long walk.

We had better get moving.

The revivalism of the 1950’s did not survive the international social and cultural changes of the late 1960’s. This is why the old fundamentalism is dying of self-inflicted wounds. Having preached social irrelevance as a way of life, it has at last achieved its goal.

Here, North speaks of the social and cultural irrelevance of the Western Christian Church in the 1970s.

If the Church was irrelevant then – and it was, obviously – then what word should be used for it today?


We need a revival. We do not need more revivalism. We need a comprehensive call to lost men to join an army that has been assigned the task of comprehensive dominion by means of Christ’s comprehensive redemption. We need a trained corps of field grade officers who understand the nature of the war. We need battle plans, a strategy of victory, tactics of confrontation, a team of recruiters, and specialists in every battle zone who know the terrain and have accurate maps. We need a comprehensive world-and-life view which is explicitly Christian. No more baptized humanism. No more neutrality. No more compulsory State-certified anything. And with respect to the humanist camp, no more Mr. Nice Guy.

This will actually happen… but with difficulty.

Quite a lot of things need to be done first, from the ditching of today’s kingdom-destroying pastorate, to the rise of meat-eating Christians, truly sick and tired of milk and mewing, and a infantile ‘faith’ refusing to obey God, refusing to grow up, refusing to take responsibility, refusing to work and sacrifice for victory, and so incapable of changing the world.

Why Christians Need to Start Being Mean

Time to get tough.

The Floating Axehead

There is an evil monster indwelling you Christian. And it’s not the devil or a demon, it’s called your flesh. It’s ruthless, relentless, cunning, subtle and subversive. It is capable of wreaking destruction in all areas of your life and you are NO match for it. It can create callouses and hardness of heart quicker than you’d imagine. It can create evil so pervasive and insidious that the only thing preventing you from acting on it is the lack of an opportunity to do so. Pride, selfishness and licentiousness are only the beginning. Your flesh is working against you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with no holidays, vacation or sick days. What do you think will become of you if you just coast along, willingly ignorant? Do you assume victory over sin is possible with a casual attitude about your sin?


You have only one hope, just…

View original post 576 more words

When the Buddhist Beat Drops

The Floating Axehead

Celebrated television personality, filmmaker and sometimes philosopher Jason Silva has over 1 million Facebook followers. He’s a cultural phenomenon who peppers social media with various vignettes and snapshots of his hobbies, passions and beliefs. To give you a flavor of his perspective, his cover photo is a quote by the noted atheist Carl Sagan. Most recently, a video of his was brought to my attention where he describes his connection with music, and what it means to him.

As a Christian, I am conflicted about this video.  On the positive side it’s beautiful to see a creature display the image of God in his desire for interaction with the transcendent within the context of community. And I get it – whether it’s going to a party, a concert whatever – experiencing something together with others can be tremendously exhilarating. In addition, if you listen closely (he talks fast), he also…

View original post 715 more words

The Kingdom is Separate from the Church

From Bojidar Marinov, on Facebook, July 22

Oh, look what Reformed theologians used to believe 150 years ago!

“The kingdom of God precedes the institution of the church, and will outlast it. The kingdom has come, is constantly coming, and will come in glory. It includes the government of God, and all the religious and moral activities of man. The visible church is a training school for the kingdom.”
-Philip Schaff

The Body of Christ is eternal… but institutions are useful only so long as they help to reach the goal. Organizations that are successful in reaching their goal should shrink in importance: while those groups that are always looking for yet another justification for the money to come in have no intention of reaching any final goal.

This is true, whether that institution is

  • the March of Dimes (polio has been gone for a long time now),
  • the US Military (has the United States ever fought a defensive war?)
  • or the Christian denominations (which will only feed their congregation milk, never meat. “The best way to keep the dependency on, and the money coming!”)

God hates corrupt institutions… and as the corrupt Church is what bears His name, it will be the first to go down. Christians who lie in God’s Name will get punished by His fist before the oppressor, the murderer, the adulterer, the pervert, the thief.

But if you are a Christian in America, you should already know this, as you can see it with your eyes every day of the week, and twice on Sundays,