Design a site like this with
Get started

Reducing Christians to Lab Rats

The secular science industry has often been reductionist when dealing with people, and in the view of this child, they are bushwhacking Christians more frequently. Indeed, atheists have accelerated their dehumanization of Christians in the past few years, and this is in conjunction with the secular science industry’s willingness to be hijacked by leftist science deniers.

Image credit before modification: Pixabay / Silvia

There have long been questions about ethics in scientific research, whether lying to test subjects in psychology, tampering with gene editing, and a host of others. In general, secular scientists have a worldview based on atheistic naturalism, so they have no consistent standard for morality.

They also believe in Darwinism, and these sidewinders display it in the way they treat other people — especially using their anti-Christian biases. Then we learn that they are also leftists. The “research” was appallingly bad, but it passed peer review (which further shows their biases). Are you surprised that they cranked out hit pieces? I’m not.

Social scientists who try to put Christians in their test tubes have the roles completely reversed.

Who do they think they are? Some social scientists (psychologists, sociologists and anthropologists) usurp the role of philosophers and theologians. They think they can treat their fellow human intellectuals like lab rats (the Ratomorphic Fallacy, according to Arthur Koestler). Well, let the philosophers and theologians return the favor and put the social scientists under the microscope.

Here are two recent papers that specifically mention Christians as a population to experiment on.

You can read the entire article by heading on over to “Christians Are Not Lab Rats“.


By Cowboy Bob Sorensen

The most important thing is that Jesus Christ is the Lord of my life. I am a biblical ("young earth") creationist that upholds the truth, inerrancy, and authority of the Bible. Science is fascinating and fun, and theology is a growth process. I will not lay claim to Calvinist or Arminian, and have actually been hated for that. Sometimes I don't feel like writing something serious or on this subject. I'm not as cool as the picture indicates.


  1. You judge atheists for not having a consistent world view, when at least we don’t claim to, whereas christianity certainly does claim to have a consistent world view and yet it’s not even consistent with itself, much less the world we know.


    1. “You judge atheists for not having a consistent world view, when at least we don’t claim to,”

      I didn’t realize that the spokesperson for all atheists everywhere would be reading my material, and I am truly honored. You should get the word out, however, that those you speak for do not agree. Also, you said I “judge” atheists. No, it is an observation. God will judge atheists.

      “whereas christianity certainly does claim to have a consistent world view and yet it’s not even consistent with itself, much less the world we know.”

      Sweeping generalization bordering on a tu quoque fallacy, plus a claim that “it’s not consistent within itself.” That is the opposite of the truth, old son. The biblical Christian worldview is consistent, but atheism is incoherent and irrational, lacking the necessary preconditions of human experience. This can be seen where atheists are essentially throwing stones at Christians who are doing the heavy lifting to improve society. (Still waiting for the Madalyn Murray O’Hair Memorial Hospital, the Clinton Richard Dawkins School for the Poor, the Lawrence Krauss Food Pantry, the Neil deGrasse Tyson Center for Drug Rehabilitation, and so on.) Also, I notice you didn’t document your claim for the aforementioned, and also that Christianity is not consistent with “the world we know”. Sorry, Skippy, I’m getting a mite irked by your bigotry and the way you totally ignored the content of the post as well as the linked article. You have no business judging me, Christianity, and especially almighty God — the God you know exists. You need to repent, because you will stand before him and confess that Jesus is Lord — whether you like it or not.


      1. I never claimed to be a spokesperson for anything – not that atheism has spokespeople, it’s a non-belief. That’s all. Amongst christians, there are many different denominations, and they certainly cannot agree on what the bible says/which parts are relevant.

        Consider being less rude and maybe we can actually learn something from one another. Please.


      2. The “non-belief” is a foolish and disingenuous redefinition of the previously established definition of atheism: a belief that there is no God or gods. Consider being less obstreperous and trying to put me on the defensive, and less bigoted against Christians. Did you have anything to say about the content of the post and the linked article, or were you going to continue to attack minutiae?


    1. Someone who names a weblog after the German word for taking pleasure in the misfortune of others makes me a mite skeptical that I may only be feeding a troll. Indeed, you claim that there are false claims, but do not show which claims are false, nor do you show why.

      “It seems that you are upset that research shows that Christians aren’t quite what they want to claim they are.”

      That’s quite a bit of a non sequitur. Even if I was upset, it has nothing to do with what I wrote or the material in the linked article. Also, you are very close to the appeal to motive fallacy.


      1. If you would actually have looked at my blog, I explain the name. I take great pleasure in people who cause their own problems from their willful ignorance and lies. This blog post, and the one it references are such lovely examples of how Christians often do that.

        The false claims here are the whines about how dare anyone research Christians and show how they really act. I do enjoy the “who do they think they are?” nonsense. Well, we think we are fellow humans, and we do research to explain the behaviors of other humans to understand them better.

        This is the usual complaint of Christians when their nonsense is exposed as the baseless opinion it is. They must claim that only theologians “really” understand them, when it is not hard to understand theists at all. With lies and strawmen arguments like this “hey begin by assuming President Biden’s mask mandate is the 11th commandment, and all Trump supporters must go to re-education camp where they will be nudged to act appropriately. ” it is very easy. One has to wonder about Christians who ignore their god when it says not to lie.

        I also love the whines about peer-reviewed papers by creationists. Poor dears, they’ve been lying for years that “real soon now” they’ll have the science to support their claims and peer-reviewed too, but alas they never can provide it.

        You also seem to have no clue what a non-sequitur is. The article you linked to and your own blog shows this quite clearly. Let’s see:

        “The “research” was appallingly bad, but it passed peer review (which further shows their biases).”

        No evidence the research is flawed at all. The conclusions are based on facts. The Christian doesn’t like it shown that Christians are no better than anyone else, despite their attempts to claim otherwise.

        From the original article “They are ones to call scientists back to righteous standards of investigation.”

        Aka, “righteous” standards of investigation that won’t show how Christians fail, removing the assumption of “goodness” from a religion. Alas, this is another bit of evidence where the Christian thinks that he and he alone is the “right” one. Alas, he can’t even convince other christians of that, or agree on what morals this god wants.

        alas, for you, and for the original author, your claims of “racism” fail since the facts support the conclusions. Alas, racists like you fail to support your claims with facts.

        There is no “anti-Christian bias”; Christians have been caught behaving badly. That eats into the false narrative you try to claim for yourselves.


        1. In other words, you make assertions and judge us. No, I didn’t look at your weblog because I had no interest in reading the scribblings of a misotheistic bigot. Lots of straw man arguments, goalpost moving, and refusal to observe the evidence. [EDIT: In your comments here.]

          So tell me, since you are judging me and Christians in general, if we were indeed lying, what would be wrong with that in your worldview? Why is it wrong?


        2. Your latest diatribe went into the spam category for some strange reason. No, Clubby, I’m not approving it. More pseudointellectual dodging and squirming, blaming other Christians, creationists, and me for your own failings. Also, you failed to address my response in any way even remotely resembling meaningful. Too much blind hatred and condescension from you, nothing resembling rationality. You’re not welcome here. EDIT: So you can forget about answering the questions I put to you in my previous comment.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: