Troy King

Nov 012014

massivegeogrFrom the article:

The Cambrian explosion is one of the most significant events in Earth’s 4.5-billion-year history. The surge of evolution led to the sudden appearance of almost all modern animal groups. Fossils from the Cambrian explosion document the rapid evolution of life on Earth, but its cause has been a mystery.

The sudden burst of new life is also called “Darwin’s dilemma” because it appears to contradict Charles Darwin’s hypothesis of gradual evolution by natural selection.

“At the boundary between the Precambrian and Cambrian periods, something big happened tectonically that triggered the spreading of shallow ocean water across the continents, which is clearly tied in time and space to the sudden explosion of multicellular, hard-shelled life on the planet,” said Dalziel, a research professor at the Institute for Geophysics and a professor in the Department of Geological Sciences.

The article on Massive geographic change may have triggered explosion of animal life.

10.coverThe original research abstract Geology, October 2014, v. 42, no. 10: Cambrian transgression and radiation linked to an Iapetus-Pacific oceanic connection? This may be available to you via your local library. My library provides online (from home!) access to many scientific journals and search services, but none of them had this article yet.


Oct 032014

010611 - Cruel Culture COLThe discussion on Facebook from the post on Headcoverings made me remember this gem of a cartoon. I contacted the cartoonist and asked permission to use it, pointing out that the context would be different since here it would be more about modesty rather than culture, as he wrote it. He very kindly allowed us to post it, so here it is! The original artist is Malcolm Evans and the title of the cartoon is Cruel Culture from January 6, 2011.

Sep 292014

I was going to say something about this, but Stuart Wall, with his gift for words, said it perfectly:

Quote from Stuart Wall on FaceBook: Didn't you read in Acts that the believers shared all things? Oh how easy it is to twist scripture when you ignore the Law. Expect worse to come before it is all over.

The article: Hot New Christian Trend: Wife-Swapping for Jesus on

The video:

Christian Wife Swappers Preach The Word Of God Through Swinging

Sep 232014

Rabbi Asher Meza says that as long as someone is Torah-observant and follow Halakha, they should not be rejected as Jewish.

Messianics are NOT HERETICS!

My question would be does he consider Karaism heretical? I suspect he does since he repeatedly refers to Halakha, but if Karaites are also not rejected from Judaism, then what of a Torah-observant non-Halakhic Messianic?

Either way, this is a big step for a Rabbi to say that Torah observance is what really matters, not whether someone believes YHVH had a body or is a unity of constituent parts.

Sep 232014

Video: The Exodus Based on the Sources Themselves

Richard Friedman – The Exodus Based on the Sources Themselves

This is Richard Friedman at UCSD’s recent Out of Egypt: Archaeology, Text & Memory conference


Sep 112014

Via Chris White on Facebook, this aligns with my understanding as well. Or maybe I’m baiting Edwin. Who can tell?

What is the Unpardonable Sin? (Dr. Alan Cairns)


[0:03] The Lord Jesus in Matthew 12 speaks of a sin that is unpardonable. It’s amazing, to me, you know, that when people read that passage they always focus on that one little thing, the one sin that is unpardonable. I have very rarely ever seen people emphasize the context and yet the context is glorious.

[Tells story about girl]

[1:53] Why do we not emphasize the magnificence of God’s mercy and just focus on this one thing? Well, it’s because, I suppose of so many false theories that people, especially preachers, tell others that it looks like they have committed the unpardonable sin.

[2:13] Actually, the Lord Jesus was very careful in defining this sin. In the context he was referring it to the Pharisees and the sin that they had committed. These particular Pharisees, they knew, according to Nicodemus, they knew that God was with Christ. Nicodemus said, We know that thou art come from God, a teacher. We know that. No man can do these miracles that thou doest except God be with him. We know that.

[2:49] And yet the Pharisees in Matthew chapter 12 deliberately attributed what they knew to be the work of the Holy Spirit, they attributed it to the Devil. And they did it for their own rotten prejudice, and their own particular, I would have to say, political or sectarian advantage. Now that’s a terrible thing. They knew this to be the work of the Holy Spirit and they attributed it to the Devil. And Jesus said, You do that, that’s blasphemy that will never be forgiven in this life or the next.

[3:35] Now when you stop to think of it, if what the Holy Ghost does is relegated to being the work of the Devil, what is there for you? The only word that can bring light to you is the word of the of Holy Ghost. The only work that can benefit you is the work of the Holy Ghost. If you have already handed it all over to the devil, there is nothing left. Jesus said, that’s the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

[4:09] Some people have gone so far as to say, and they may well be right in this, that that was a sin which could be committed only with regard to the personal ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ, because these men had seen the Son of God through whom the Spirit of God  moved with such power, they had seen that. Nobody else now-a-days, for example, can see that, so some people will limit that blasphemy, that particular sin, to the days of Christ on earth. Be they right or wrong on that, certainly it is defined as the deliberate attribution to the devil of what they knew to be the work of the Holy Spirit. That is the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.

Sep 092014

This new article at The Washington Post, Long-forgotten secrets of whale sex revealed, has just confirmed something Hovind has been teaching for decades:

“People that really know the reproductive biology of whales and dolphins already know and have known that these pelvic bones are an anchor point for reproductive organs,” co-corresponding author and Collections Manager of Mammalogy at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Jim Dines said. “But it’s not something that they teach you in a marine mammal class.” Outside of a small circle of experts in whale anatomy, he said, the common consensus, even among marine biologists, was that the pelvis was a useless bone — one that would disappear, given a few million years more of evolution.

Kent Hovind, has been teaching this since the 1990s, as seen in this clip from Creation Science Series, Disc 4 – “Lies in the Textbooks”:

This textbook says, “The whale has a vestigial pelvis.” ….. Now, excuse me, that is not a vestigial pelvis! Those bones are necessary because muscles attach to those bones. And without those bones and those muscles the whales cannot reproduce. It has nothing to do with walking on land. It has to do with getting more baby whales. So the author that wrote this is either ignorant of his whale anatomy and should not be writing a book about it, or he’s a liar trying to promote his theory.

He’s been widely mocked for it, but now that he’s been proven correct, the apologies will start rolling in. Right?

Read the full article at The Washington Post.

Sep 092014

I admit surprise. According to the article:

…The Department of Education, which surely isn’t happy with the trend, has tracked the issue since 2003. According to its findings:

  • In 2003, 85 percent of parents said they chose homeschooling because of “a concern about the school environment” which included worry about safety, drugs or negative peer pressure. That number jumped to 91 percent by 2011.
  • In 2003, 72 percent said “a desire to provide religious or moral instruction” was a major reason. In 2011, that number had increased to 77 percent.
  • In 2003, 68 percent said “dissatisfaction with academic instruction at other schools” contributed to their decision. By 2011, that was up to 74 percent.

These are in line with the reasons we homeschooled our daughter for most of her school years.

Read the full article at The Daily Signal.

Sep 092014

This was a question asked on the Debate A Christian subreddit that I haunt. This was my answer:

Assuming you mean what happened to the mixing of the supposedly freshwater rain and the salt oceans, this is a reminder that the bible doesn’t claim the flood came only from rain. The flood water also came from “the fountains of the deep”. We don’t know what the composition of that water was.

In an article in Nature the lead author, a mantle geochemist says “… the transition zone could hold as much water as all the Earth’s oceans put together. Continue reading »