Truth Be Known

I've been a fan of Neil Young's music going all the way back to his days with Buffalo Springfield. "Truth Be Known" is one of my favorite songs by Neil  (backed by Pearl Jam minus Eddie Vedder, with Neil on lead vocals), on his CD Mirror Ball. Pearl Jam fans -- please don't rush out to buy the CD just because Stone Gossard and Mike McCready are playing rhythm and lead guitars behind Neil, and Jeff Ament is on bass. You might be disappointed. At least, listen to "I'm the Ocean" and "Big Green Country" before you make a purchase decision either way. In fairness, at the very least, you need to be aware that Eddie Vedder only sings a single verse on one song. It's not a Pearl Jam album, by any stretch of the imagination. Fans of Neil Young, however,..shame on you if you don't already own a copy. Neil's vocals are an acquired taste, but you've already acquired it, right? The guys from Pearl Jam certainly seemed to have invigorated Young on the 1995 release. I especially liked the guitar work of Gossard and McCready on "Big Green Country", and the lyrics from one particular verse in "Truth Be Known" that went: When the fire that once was your friend Burns your fingers to the bone And your song meets a sudden end Echoing through right and wrong Truth be known... There is great wisdom in those words -- nothing hurts worse than being betrayed by a friend. Try to imagine what Jesus must have felt like, when Judas kissed his cheek. Of course, if you're a conspiracy theorist like D. M. Murdock, you may not even believe Jesus existed. By strange coincidence, a … [Read more...]

What makes some atheists so angry?

Contrary to popular belief (of my critics), it doesn't really bother me if people call themselves atheists. I'm not a big fan of anti-theists, though. Life is too short to spend much time in the company of thoroughly unpleasant people. What annoys me more than anything is when people presume that I'm stupid and try talking down to me merely because I have identified myself as theist-agnostic. Because I believe in a supernatural God, they immediately assume that I'm some sort of idiot, before I can even say another word. Since we are all agnostic by nature, we can then claim to be either theist, atheist, or apathetic (because you apparently don't care enough and don't know enough to even form an opinion). While describing my beliefs, I usually attempt to justify them using scientific evidence, logic, reason, and common sense. This strategy often upsets my atheist counterpart, because rarely if ever do I refer to the Bible, unless I am forced to defend my Christian beliefs. I certainly know better than to assert I can prove what I believe to be true beyond any and all doubt. Nor can I claim to know with absolute certainty that I'm right about everything (or anything) that I believe. Hence the "agnostic" bit was added as a qualifier. This was all explained in my book Counterargument for God, though perhaps not quite this clearly -- I meant to say that everyone should consider themselves agnostic. Nobody knows for sure the true nature of our supernatural Creator, nor even whether or not God actually exists. According to my analysis, however, the probability of … [Read more...]

Evolution and the origin of life: analysis by C. W. Bobbitt, PhD

This article written by (retired) Professor Charles W. Bobbitt explains his interpretations of the evidence that may explain the origin of life and the origin of species currently available to the scientific community. Only minor formatting changes have been made to improve its readability. Professor Bobbitt's thoughts regarding the origin of the universe and the Big Bang theory were published earlier here at southernprose.com. Since my book inspired the beginning of our conversation, I am taking the opportunity for shameless self promotion, perhaps even to sell a couple of books in the process. The original plan was to publish a photo of Professor Bobbitt with a short biography describing his background and academic credentials, but apparently our wires have gotten crossed, and the article has been ready to be published for several days. As always, reader comments are welcomed. [Special thanks to Joel Washburn for his expert assistance resolving a rather puzzling and difficult technical problem that prohibited earlier publication of this piece.] A FRESH LOOK AT THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF LIFE ON EARTH C.W. Bobbitt, PhD © Copyright 2014, C.W. Bobbitt In a sense, both Darwin and Wickramasinghe/Hoyle were right in their suggestions as to how life on earth began, as will be shown in this hypothesis; but first, let us make a few remarks to serve as a framework for this presentation, in order to avoid unnecessary and unproductive conflict. Mortal man has been endowed with an insatiable curiosity. He wants to know things simply because they are … [Read more...]

Carbon dating and the Shroud of Turin

If queried for their opinion about the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, probably 9 out of every 10 people would essentially say the same thing -- carbon testing performed in 1988 clearly proved that the religious artifact was nothing more than a brilliantly conceived fraud. I can't say that I find fault with the Shroud's critics, because I've seen the same evidence. After all, test results obtained by careful application of the scientific method are really tough to dispute. And the 1988 tests seemed to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the Shroud was a forgery. Even as stubborn as I can be when it comes to accepting "facts" when other people have told them to me, I must concede that when multiple independent tests have reached the same conclusion, it is almost always because they invariably have gotten the correct answers. It should be noted that the key word in the sentence above is "almost." As part of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) three different laboratories in Zurich, Oxford, and Tucson performed independent carbon dating tests. They all concluded the alleged fake shroud was supposedly manufactured sometime between 1290 and 1360 AD, ostensibly for no other reason than to fool a lot of people and legitimize belief in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Interestingly, the STURP experiments produced a puzzling mix of results. Tests and analysis eliminated any possibility the image on the fabric had been painted. One test indicated that a copious amount of human blood had saturated the fabric after oozing from the gruesome … [Read more...]

Atheism and life after death

Why are atheists so adamantly opposed to the idea that consciousness could possibly survive physical death of the human brain? For several years now, I've conducted personal research mostly to satisfy my own curiosity about what might happen when we die. I've read dozens, if not hundreds of articles describing various scientific studies of the near death experience to learn what doctors and scientists think they have discovered about this phenomena. I've personally interviewed people making NDE claims. I seen enough and read enough to believe that the mind and brain separate at death. The spiritual mind survives; the physical brain does not. Dr. Bruce Greyson established what is now called the Greyson NDE scale of 16 specific attributes many alleged NDE claims share in common. These attributes include seeing a bright light at the end of a tunnel, reuniting with dead relatives, the sensation of leaving their physical body, etc. My atheist friends have vehemently argued that these events are hallucinogenic in nature, originating from chemicals produced by the dying brain to make the transition to death more pleasant and less traumatic. However, the typical atheist's arguments are fatally flawed, for two reasons. First of all, not every NDE is a pleasant or euphoric experience. Some are quite terrifying. After learning about his experience from the television program I Survived: Beyond and Back, the reason I sought to interview Matthew Botsford in particular was because he was by every account an innocent bystander accidentally gunned down in a drive-by shooting … [Read more...]