The first response to the no young-earth creationism edict

Written by Paul Zannucci on 6:50 PM

My first email response from dictating that no one write from a young-earth creationist perspective on the site

I'm not going to take my ball and go home over the "age of the earth" thing (and in fact I argue from the view of "old earth" when trying to convince someone of the Creator God of the Bible), but...

I look at the flat-out mockery that "science" has made of "the science of global warming" and compare it to the similar mockery that "science" made out of "the science of evolution." And I realize the IDENTICAL crap is going on with global warming that has gone on with Darwinian evolution for decades. It's not about "science"; it's about a philosophy or ideology that is IMPOSED onto science which is then itself then called "science."

I'm personally very open to a young earth view. I trust what the Bible says far more than I trust what the people who gave Al Gore a Nobel Prize for science say. I don't see one reason whatsoever anymore to allow "science" to dictate what I believe and what I accept to be true given the terrible history of deception and propaganda that way too many scientists have propagated in its name. They've pretty much forfeited all credibility in the "meta" issues.

To put it this way: Christians don't need the young earth view to be true to be Christians; neither do they necessarily need evolution to be false to be Christians. Atheists NEED the old earth view AND evolution to be true. So they must necessarily be entirely rabid and vicious on both fronts. Christians can and should be willing to argue with light rather than heat on the age of the universe. Bottom line: none of us were there when God created all time, space, energy, and matter ex nihilo. And the biblical record of Genesis 1-4 is definitely open to interpretation.

I'm just sayin'.

(note: this person did eventually "take his ball and go home.")

The 2nd email in the chain
The 1st email in the chain

By the way, sort of on this topic, I wrote a piece today on Ida: Missing Link

2nd for clarification...

Written by Paul Zannucci on 12:37 PM

The second email I sent in that series, regarding clarification of my personal stance:

And just to clarify for all who may not know me well enough, I may side with science on almost all issues, pretty much on everything except the notion that an omnipotent God can't break His own rules when He wants to; and I may not side with social conservatism a lot because I believe in personal responsibility over forced behavior; yet, still, my faith is strong and getting stronger.

I used to run an apologetics web site until I allowed myself to be run off by the fundamentalists (not the atheists, mind you, but the fundamentalists), but I will get back to that some day in the next year. I own (domain removed), and intend it to be a force to be reckoned with.

Go see email #1

So this was the email that started the battle...

Written by Paul Zannucci on 10:31 PM

Email # 1 from me, igniting the theological/philosophic argument ready to ensue...

Not naming names (name removed) but the best way to communicate with me over site errors is actually to send me an email as opposed to placing a comment in some random location on the site ; )p But I did fix the registration process.


Got us linked up a bunch of places, and we've had our best "search engine" day by far (largely owing to our gleeful skewering of Wanda Sykes). So far today we've had 171 search engine hits. We still aren't on the first 50 pages of Google for "Political News" but that may well be in the top 5 most competitive keywords out there considering how often news sites are linked from blogs. On the bright side, in addition to our search hits improving, we do come up on page 1 in Google for Annuit Coeptis now. Search engine hits will go up and down, but the overall trend should continually be upward. Linking will continue until we pass CNN...

Got annoyed at a troll and created a page called "Age of Earth." By the way, I have a great deal of flexibility on almost all issue positions, but on this one I do not. It is the official, and only, stance of Annuit Coeptis that the planet is approximately 4.5 billion years old. I'm not telling you to be a naturalist, but we don't argue about things like the age of the planet.

Fixed (name removed) and (name removed) in the sidebar. If (name removed) would like a different picture, please let me know.

At some point I added a "Most Popular Stories" to the sidebar, at least I think it was me. Hey, I said my brain was improving; I didn't say it was perfect. It will show the most popular posts from the last seven days.

Did some category work, but am still a little unsettled as to what, exactly, to do there.

Made a slight design adjustment.

Made a short blog post.

Monetized our feedburner feed with adsense--at least I think I did. That process was a bit odd. We now have 4 subscribers. I'm getting tingly.

Put up the "Help Wanted" sign, but with a little twist this time...

The Grand Debate

Written by Paul Zannucci on 3:58 PM

While working the start up of Annuit Coeptis we were presented with a typical, irrelevant, obnoxious liberal response from a reader who said that the author of a particular article probably believed in a young Earth. The article had nothing to do with anything remotely related to that, of course, and neither the author nor I believe in a young Earth, and so I decided, just to remove all doubt, to create a page on the site dedicated to dispelling the popular notion that all Christians and conservatives believe in bad, young Earth science.

While all the writers for the site agree that the planet is approximately 4.5 billion years old, per science, we still managed to get into one whopper of a debate on that topic that then transformed into a topic regarding not only the age of the planet but also homosexuality.

Sadly, this lively and informed debate was carried out exclusively via email. Fortunately, I have saved them all. Over the next few days, I'm going to be posting these emails for everyone to see. They really make for fascinating reads.

Wrote a new piece for Annuit coeptis

Written by Paul Zannucci on 11:42 AM

I'm getting more and more tired of identity politics, which has now become the accepted norm under the Obama administration. After decades of America coming to the realization that identiy politics was nothing but bad policy designed to create a sort of tyranny by elevating one portion of the population over another, we see this bad policy crashing to the forfront once again, and this time with little to no opposition.

You can read my report here: Identity Politics

New Blog

Written by Paul Zannucci on 2:23 PM

As some may know, I founded the American Sentinel blog last year which grew to some popularity. For a variety of reasons, I left the blog in the capable hands of Jay Henderson and pretty much stopped political blogging except for coming back here occasionally.

Well, for a variety of reasons, American Sentinel was forced to change it name and move to a new domain, and I have taken back ownership of the site. I will still continue to post here, though very infrequently I would imagine.

My new home base for political ranting will be here Political News

I did the site design myself. Ain't it pretty?