Why Theistic Evolution Is Stupid

First, we must give the Devil his due; that is, some of the theistic evolution websites are very persuasive. However, they are very persuasive only to those with little or no knowledge on the subject of evolution.

Theistic evolutionists believe that God used evolution in the process of creating man. Their failure is that they engage in an uncritical acceptance of certain scientific postulates and principles. In other words, they either haven’t done their homework or they haven’t done enough homework. For example, they accept the transitional forms (ape-men, not man-apes) as fact when, in reality, there is not perfect agreement in the scientific community as to the principles supporting the conclusions regarding these so-called transitional forms.

See our evolution website EON Super Nexus for more information.

Why Is God Allowing My Sanity To Be Threatened?

God is allowing your sanity to be threatened (a life hallucination [see Why Is God Somewhat Stingy? for an explanation of life hallucination]) so that you will engage in the paradoxical drama (see our other articles on paradoxical drama; especially, Why Is God Somewhat Stingy?)…so that you will engage in the paradoxical drama of seeking something other than God to maintain your sanity.

Why Is God Unfaithful (Inconsistent)?

Why is God unfaithful (inconsistent)? That is, why doesn’t God keep his word all of the time? Well, once again, we are dealing with paradoxical drama. You must read our earlier articles on this subject to be able to understand this article:

Note that God is not really unfaithful.

Now, why is God unfaithful?

So that we will engage in the paradoxical drama of putting material defenses above trusting God. Note that we did not say so that we do not trust God but rather that material defenses are to be given greater priority than faith in God.

Material defenses are money, food, clothing, shelter, guns, police, military, etc., etc.

Note that the logic behind this paradoxical drama is that, while unfaithfulness, per se (in itself), calls for a cessation of trust in God…since God is the only source of supply, we cannot cut ourselves off from him completely. Therefore, rather than cessation of faith in God, logic dictates a synthesis, subordination of faith in God.

Why Does God Sometimes Send Unbearable Torment?

You must read Why Is God Somewhat Stingy? first to be able to understand this article; especially, the concept of pardoxical drama. You may also read Why Does God Sometimes Make Our Faith Pointless? for some additional insight. Note that God does not really sometimes send unbearable torment.

Now, why does God sometimes send unbearable torment? First, the unbearability is unconsciously unreal, which is proven by the fact that we do not lose control of ourselves. So, why does God send the experience?

So that we will engage in the paradoxical drama of subordinating everything else in our lives to the work of eliminating the unbearable torment; that is, so that we put the elimination of the unbearable torment before every other task and responsibility.

Why Does God Sometimes Make Our Faith Pointless?

You must read Why Is God Somewhat Stingy? first to be able to understand this article; especially, the concept of pardoxical drama. Note that God does not really sometimes make our faith pointless.

Now, why does God sometimes make our faith pointless?

So that we will engage in the paradoxical drama of acting without faith, which would be having faith but doing what you would do if you had no faith.

Why Is God Somewhat Stingy?

Now, we can hear the uproar in certain communities at the idea that God is stingy to some degree. Well, that is because of their ignorance of the divinely ordained complexity of the human experience.

Now, is God somewhat stingy? In terms of fact, no. In terms of apparent fact, for some people, yes. Okay. So what is apparent fact? Apparent fact is belief resulting from unrecognized life hallucination. What is life hallucination?

An hallucination that comprises (makes up) a period of one’s life. Such a period of one’s life could last for seconds or minutes or hours or days or weeks or months or years.

So, why does God send these painful life hallucinations? Of course, with some people it is because of sin. But, with other people, good and decent people, it has a different purpose. That purpose is:

Paradoxical drama.

What is paradoxical drama?

Paradoxical drama is acting as if, though not really the case, God is defective in some way. In this case, it is acting as if, though not really the case, God is somewhat stingy.

How do you know that God wants you to engage in this paradoxical drama? If this were not true, God would truly be somewhat stingy.

So, how do you act as if God is somewhat stingy?

You plan your life accordingly. You say to yourself, “In effect, though not really, God is not going to provide me with everything I need. Therefore, I must save some resources – money, time, energy, property, food, clothing, shelter, etc. – for future use.”

Evolution: The “Man-Apes”

There is disagreement in the evolutionary scientific community as to the validity of methods used to analyze and evaluate fossils. However, let us assume, for the moment, that the methods are valid. What would this mean?

What it would mean is that there were extinct “man-apes.” What would these man-apes have been. There are two views – evolutionary and data.

Evolutionary View

The evolutionary view is that the man-apes were transitional forms; that is, life-forms between more ancient apes and man.

Data View

The man-apes would have been ancient apes with higher intelligence and more human-looking appearance than modern apes.

Analysis of Views

The evolutionary view is based on a mixture of data and fantasy. The fantasy is that the man-apes gave birth to human beings. However, no birth fossils (fossils of mothers giving birth to babies) have ever been found.

The data view is always correct because it simply reports the facts.


If fossil analysis/evaluation methodologies are valid, there were ancient apes with higher intelligence and more human-looking appearance than modern apes. There are no birth fossils to prove that they gave birth to human beings.


Masturbation is not one act. It is two acts performed at the same time. We call these acts “stations.” The stations are the:

  1. Action Station
  2. Experience Station

Action Station

This is simply the physical activity involved in masturbation. We have no commandment of God about it. However, the Bible teaches that spiritual leaders should sometimes give their judgment about whether something is right or wrong. Our judgment is that the action station of masturbation is so private that it should be left up to the individual’s judgment.

Experience Station

This is the experiential activity involved in masturbation; that is, the imagination and/or sight of pornographic content. Here, we have clear commandment of God:

One must not choose to engage in the experience station (imagination and/or sight of pornographic content).

We emphasize the word “choose” because there are unchosen processes that occur in human beings; for example, sexual dreams, which are never sins. See our sexuality think tank at Sexual Karate: The Mastery of Self-Control for more information.

Evolution: Transitional Forms: Humans

It is common knowledge that some life-forms are extinct (no longer exist); for example, the dinosaurs. The so-called transitional forms leading up to human beings, if we accept the scientific methodology as reliable, would have simply been more anthropomorphic (more human-looking) apes now extinct and nothing more. Also, any so-called, human-like abilities would be accounted for by more advanced intelligence than modern apes.

In simpler terms, if the transitional forms are real:

They would have simply been smarter, more human-looking APES from which man did NOT descend (did NOT evolve).

PS: In the future, we will refer to these “unproven” creatures as “man-apes.”

Evolution’s Skull Game

We have proven that similarity is not proof of evolution (see Evolution’s Great Fallacy). So, what do we have below? Evolutionists would say, “See how the skull evolved over time.” But what we really have is nothing more than a set of skulls of different apes and of a human being lined up by similarity.


Lined Up By Similarity

To make our point clearer, here are the same skulls lined up by age.


Lined Up By Age

Evolution’s Great Fallacy

The great fallacy of evolution is:

Similarity proves parentage.

In other words because two animals resemble each other one must give birth to the other . Well, let’s see. A zebra resembles a horse. That must mean zebras give birth to horses or horses give birth to zebras. An alligator is similar to a crocodile; therefore, one of them must give birth to the other. And then there’s the turtles and tortoises and the frogs and toads and the dolphins and porpoises and the donkeys and mules. We could go on.

So, sorry evolutionists but:

Similarity does not prove parentage.

Are The Days Of Genesis 24-Hour Days?

Are the days of Genesis 24-hour days? Well, first, we must define the context of the question. There are two contexts. They are science and truth. Now, remember:

Science isn’t necessarily truth.

See our discussion elsewhere on the subject of the difference between science and truth.

In terms of science and not truth, the days of Genesis:

Might not be 24-hour days.

In terms of truth and not science

The days of Genesis are 24-hour days.

The most important thing to remember on the “day length” question is that:

Science does not disprove the Bible.



Science does disprove the Koran.


Science does disprove every other so-called holy book on the planet.

De We Hate Islam?

De We Hate Islam? First, we do not hate Muslims. Now, do we hate Islam, the religion of Muslims? Yes. Why? For many reasons. Two of the biggest reasons are its teachings, which are the teachings of their holy book, the Koran, that children may be abused and women may be abused.

Why Evolutionists Are Evil

Evolutionists are evil because they apply evolution to a realm that evolution has nothing to do with – the spirtual realm. Evolution has to do with plants and animals. It has nothing to do with God and angels. Evolution has to do with protoplasm, nuclei, and mitochondria. It has nothing to do with spirt, mind, and soul. Evolution has to do with adaptation and natural selection. It has nothing to do with salvation and divine election. So, evolutionists, stick to what you know – plants and animals – and keep your mouths shut about what you don’t know – the deep things of life: God and human immortality.

BOSS (Biological Origins Science) Surpasses Evolutionary Science

Evolutionary science promotes the mythical ideas of evolution, adaptation, and natural selection, among others. BOSS (Biological Origins Science) teaches the truth that, instead, there is the evolution construct, adaptation construct, and natural selection construct, which are mental constructs imposed on the biological world and not actual, physical entities.

The proof that evolution, adaptation, and natural selection are imaginary entities is the fact that evolutionary science has never identified physicochemical agents or processes that define these entities. Nevertheless, the corresponding mental constructs, properly termed the “evolution construct,” “adaptation construct,” and “natural selection construct,” are useful in organizing biological history.

BOSS: Biological Origins Science


The purpose of science is the expansion of knowledge. The tools of science are certainty and uncertainty. If you are looking for certainty, do not look to science but, rather, look to the parent of science, the scientific method. – Dr. Michael Bisconti

The scientific method is recognition and formulation of a problem followed by collection of data through observation and experiment ending with formulation and testing of hypotheses. – Dr. Michael Bisconti

BOSS: Biological Origins Science

Except for the people-from-apes thing, evolutionary science is correct (we didn’t say “true”) and contradicts nothing in the Bible. It is unfortunate that many have alienated so many others from the riches of knowledge found in evolutionary science. Now, because of the entrenched stigma (discredit) associated with the term “evolutionary science,” we have coined the term “biological origins science” or “BOSS” for short. Remember, there is one difference between BOSS and evolutionary science, you are not a product of evolution .

Evolution’s Myth Of Forces

In physics, objects “experience” force. For example, a paper clip “experiences” the force (pull) of a magnet and the oceans “experience” the gravitational pull of the sun. These forces manifest themselves in changes in physical objects. They exist in the physical world.

In evolutionary theory, all of the so-called forces have no existence in the physical world. There are no evolutionary entities that act on physical objects. Evolution, natural selection, and adaptation, which are the so-called forces of evolution, do not pull on paper clips or pull on the oceans. They don’t exist. What are they then? They are extrapolations (imaginations logically but not experimentally associated with reality). Thus, the whole system of evolutionary thinking rests on pure imagination .

Evolutionists Trying To Pull A Big Trick On Everyone

As evolutionists have seen their position weaken they are trying to pull a big trick on everyone. They are:

Trying to change the definition of evolution to hide the fact that they include human beings.

Instead of saying:

All species from one species

They are now saying:

One species from one species

Not so fast you rotten bums (forgive my language). You have:

Over a century and a half of grief and societal disruption to pay for.

Scientific Breakthrough: E2 Science

Dr. Michael J. Bisconti is the founder of the science of empirical epistemology with over half a century of accumulated, scientific data and observations.

“E2 Science” is shorthand for “Empirical Epistemology.” What is empirical epistemology? Well, first, what is epistemology? We’ll give you Webster’s definition first then we’ll provide an easier to understand explanation:

Epistemology is the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity.

Or simply:

Epistemology is an explanation of what knowledge is and how to prove it is knowledge.

In the past, for millenia, epistemology has been provided by philosophers (thinkers). Well, in our age of science, that is not enough. Hence, we established:

Empirical Epistemology

“Empirical” means “based on experience.” Thus, empirical epistemology is:

The first scientific approach to epistemology

In other words:

We have established through scientific observation (experience) what knowledge is and how to prove it is knowledge.

Now, other researchers have been working on this as well and are prepared to take credit for our achievement. Therefore, we are copyrighting our work before we publish it. We will say this, though:

Those of you on a seemingly endless and futile quest for certainty, your search is amost over.

Is Evolution A Threat? (Breakthrough Article)

Evolution, a mere hypothesis, is not a threat. What is a threat is the teaching that evolution disproves the Bible. The linchpin (“something that holds an account together”) of the Genesis account is the fact that God created man in less than 24 hours. This directly contradicts the ape-to-human component of the evolutionary schedule.

Well, first, the idea of creation , according to the Bible, is not necessarily instantaneous but can involve the passage of time (see Genesis 2). Second, the idea of creation can be a history rather than an event (see Genesis 2). A history is a sequence of events. In addition, creation can be synoptic (a summary) rather than journalistic (a precise report) (see Genesis 1).

The key thing here is that creation can be synoptic (a summary). Genesis 1 states that God created the first female, which apparently is a single event, but Genesis 2 says that the creation of the first female involved two events (skeletal amputation followed by skeletal transformation). So, obviously, Genesis 1 was synoptic; that is, only presenting a summary .

What we have proven is that Genesis 1 contains synoptic content. This means that the whole Genesis creation account may have been synoptic. This, in turn, means that there could have been billions of years of creation. And, finally, billions of years of creation could mean that the human body evolved over time then on a certain day, the “sixth day,” God gave the human body a soul.

What does all of this prove?

It proves that evolution does not disprove the Bible.

Now, was a day a day or was it billions of years? We don’t know and it doesn’t matter, scientifically speaking. And, remember, science isn’t necessarily truth. In terms of truth, a day was a day.

Finally, we still oppose evolution because it is unprovable. It is unprovable because it is experimentally unverifiable. And, remember, adaptation, called also “microevolution,” is not evolution. Evolution must, forever, remain a hypothesis or, at best, at some distant time in the future, a theory.

Evolutionists Fail Drone Survey

10,000 evolutionists were surveyed by Drone. They were asked 3 questions.

Question 1: Is evolution a force or an event?

Q1 Results: 99.6% of evolutionists replied that evolution is a force.

Sorry, Charlie. Darwin said that evolution is an event.

Question 2: Is natural selection a force or an event?

Q2 Results: 98% of evolutionists replied that natural selection is a force.

Sorry, Charlie. Darwin said that natural selection is an event.

Question 3: Is adaptation a force or an event?

Q3 Results: 99% of evolutionists replied that adaptation is a force.

Sorry, Charlie. Darwin said that adaptation is an event.

Conclusion: Given the survey results, why do we give evolutionists so much credit for being smart people?

Information For Baby Thinkers

For those of you who are very young or very immature, note that words can be used in more than one sense. On The Accidental Vigilante website we use the word “vigilante” in two senses. One sense is the regular, Wild West, lawbreaking sense. The other is a figurative sense in which we are talking about law-abiding people who have a need that is not met by traditional law enforcement.

Hypothetical Examples Of (Lawbreaking) Vigilante Action

So far, at The Accidental Vigilante and posted here as well, we have provided two hypothetical (imaginary) examples of (lawbreaking) vigilante action based on numerous, real life, historical events. Their purpose is to show that (lawbreaking) vigilantism can be successful. However, martial action of any form must also never be lawbreaking and, if you know the law, it never has to be lawbreaking.

Martial Rules Versus Vigilante Rules

We have revised our presentation on The Accidental Vigilante website. The vigilante rules have been replaced with martial rules. The difference is one of context. If there is justification for martial action, the rules are martial rules. If there is no justification for martial action, the rules are vigilante rules.

Justification is one of the following:

To save human life.
To preserve human health.
To save human life and to preserve human health.

Is It Time To Start Killing Evolutionists?

Is it time to start killing evolutionists? The answer is, first, no and, second, it will never be time to start killing evoluionists. We understand how infuriating their ignorance and muleheaded stubbornness is but such killing is never justified (see the Bible and The Accidental Vigilante).

However, there may be a lesser form of martialism possible. We are working on this question.

Visit our anti evolutionist think tank EON Super Nexus.

Hypothetical Example 2 Of (Lawbreaking) Vigilante Action: Gang Drive-By Baby Killers

Situation: A car drives by a home and fires guns into the home, killing a newborn baby.

Discovery: We find out about it the next day.

Our Response: We report the incident to the police and find out that they had already been informed.

Police Response: Police investigate and fail to find out who the killers were.

Our Response: We speak with our contacts in the neighborhood and find out the gang with whom the killers are associated. We provide this information to the police.

Follow-Up: Police question gang but cannot identify the killers.

Our Response: We seek to identify the killers. Gang will not cooperate. We make a threat assessment and a PCPA (police/courts protection ability) assessment, and develop a response plan.

Follow-Up: Three masked individuals deliver an ultimatum to the gang to give up the killers or suffer unspecified consequences.

Targets’ Friends’ (Gang) Response: Gang refuses to cooperate.

Our Response: We make a second threat assessment and a second PCPA (police/courts protection ability) assessment, and develop a response plan.

Follow-Up: Mysteriously, every day for a year, at least one person wearing the gang’s colors has both of their legs broken by three masked individuals.

Follow-Up: There have been no drive-by incidents in the community for the past three years.

Hypothetical Example 1 Of (Lawbreaking) Vigilante Action: Husband Beats Wife

Here is our first hypothetical example of vigilante action:

Situation: A man beats his wife every day for a month.

Discovery: We find out about it at the end of the month.

Our Response: We report the situation to the police.

Police Response: Police visit the home.

Follow-Up: Man beats his wife every day for a second month.

Discovery: We find out about it at the end of the second month, make a threat assessment and a PCPA (police/courts protection ability) assessment, and develop a response plan.

Our Response: We confront the man and tell him that he must stop or he will be stopped.

Target’s Response: Man beats his wife again that night.

Discovery: We find out about it the next day.

Our Response: An unidentified pair of masked individuals meet the man on his way home from work and break his right arm then tell him he will get worse if he beats his wife again. Anonymous donors support the couple financially until the man recovers and can return to work.

Follow-Up: Man has not beaten his wife for the past two years.