Is the internet marketing of EvoWiki being run by RationalWiki baboons? Also, March 15, 2013, the Ides of March, was a BAD day for Darwinism just like we predicted!

 Questions:

1.   Is the internet marketing for the website EvoWiki being run by RationalWiki baboons?

2.  Was March 15, 2013, the Ides of March, a BAD day for Darwinism, just like we predicted?

3. Is there compelling evidence that Creation Ministries International has momentum and is on its way to be a creationist powerhouse in America?

March 15, 2013, the Ides of March, was a BAD day for Darwinism just like we predicted!






If you click on the Quantcast graphs above, you will see that March 15, 2013 was a bad day for Darwinism, just like we predicted!

For more information on how March 15, 2013, the Ides of March, was a very BAD day for Darwinism, please see:

March 15, 2013 was a very BAD day for Darwinism

Momentum!  Creation Ministries International keeps receiving more and more web traffic from United States. It is poised to be a creationist powerhouse in the United States.  

The web traffic of Creation Ministries International keeps growing in America and the percentage of web traffic coming from America is growing too.  Also, today it is reported that based on Quantcast's index of websites, that Creation.com has a uniques index of 112 from United States web traffic which is 12 points higher than the average website in their database.    

On October of 2012, its Quantcast  uniques index for United States web traffic was only 106.  See:  Proof and evidence that the Question Evolution! Campaign is growing in America

On November 6, its Quantcast uniques index from the United States was 110.  See: Grinding down of American Darwinism

Based on our research, we believe that Creation.com can increase its number of web visitors from  America by 170,000 web visitors a month  in two years. It is very doable. 

Why is this important? 

It is important because Gallup recently showed that American young earth creationism is now growing in America and now stands at 46% of Americans. In addition, our Question Evolution! group  has a goal of creating a creationist majority in the United States which is a key battleground.  See: Creating a creationist majority in America and bringing down the walls of Darwinism
 
Is the internet marketing for EvoWiki being run by RationalWiki baboons?

And once people get a taste of real science when it comes to origins, they will never go back to evolutionary bunkum websites like EvoWiki which now has such low web traffic that Compete.com no longer tracks it. The website traffic tracking company Compete reported that as of August 20, 2012,  EvoWiki had only 771 unique visitors a month.  Evidently, its fortunes have fallen even lower.

According to Whois, the website EvoWiki now has the registered owner Trent Toulouse under the registrant organization the RationalWiki Foundation.  RationalWiki is an atheiem leaning website. In addition, a fellow atheist recently said that RationalWiki was overrun by baboons.  See: RationalWiki overrun by baboons?

Questions: 

1.  Is the internet marketing for EvoWiki being run by baboons?  

2.  If RationalWikians don't understand internet marketing, do they also fail to understand computer science as well? 

Question Evolution! Campaign resources and other resources

Question Evolution! Campaign

15 questions for evolutionists

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 1 - Questions 1-3

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 4–8

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 9-15 
  
Other related resources

Atheism, agnosticism and humanism: Godless religions

Refuting evolution

Evidence for Christianity

More evidence for Christianity

Creation Ministries International Question Evolution! Videos

• Question Evolution! campaign - Introduction

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists -- General objections

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists -- Question 1

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists -- Question 2

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 3

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 4

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 5

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 6

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 7

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 8

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 9

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 10

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 11

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 12

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 13

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 14

• 15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 15

 Graphic credits:

Description: English: GoMomentum.com Logo

Date 1 June 2011

Source: HoodStacey, see: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Momentum-Solid-BLK.jpg

License: This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. see: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en

Two challenges to the dwindling fan base of atheist Farrell "forgotten" Till

The atheist Farrell Till was recently given the moniker Farrell "forgotten" Till by the Christian apologist James Patrick Holding.

Below I have a web traffic tracking graph from Compete.com illustrating how quickly forgotten many atheists and their "scholarship" is forgotten. Mr. Internet Atheist Evangelist, please keep this graph  in mind next you feel tempted to post some foolish tripe on the internet.  In addition, I have two challenges to the dwindling fan base of atheist Farrell "forgotten" Till.

Till specialized in alleging the Bible is supposedly riddled with errors and contractions. Many atheists and other Bible skeptics spuriously claim this due to their poor grasp of the Bible exegesis process and their illogical processes of evaluating historical claims (see debate challenge below).

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia founded by the atheist Jimmy Wales and the agnostic Larry Sanger. In recent times, the English version of Wikipedia has had declining web visits, a shrinking editor base and it is expected that the website Quorum will be Wikipedia's worst nightmare.

An excerpt from the Wikipedia article on Farrell Till:

John Farrell Till, (born on April 26, 1933) and known commonly as Farrell Till, was the editor of the formerly published Skeptical Review and is a prominent debater against Christianity and Biblical inerrancy in particular, having published several critical articles of the inerrancy subject as well as skeptical examinations of other Biblical interpretations.

You will soon see by the Compete.com graph below that Farrell Till is not "known commonly" and he is not a prominent debater. The Wikipedia article was last edited on June 1, 2012.  Apparently, it was edited by one of Till's few remaining atheist fans who desperately wish to reject biblical authority.

A less flattering description of Farrell Till and his lack of a substantial legacy is given in JP Holding's article Farrell Forgotten.

Also, I also give web traffic tracking data for the website Bibletools.com to show that the classic Bible commentator work of Matthew Henry and Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown  is still capturing sizable public interest. Of course, there are many Bible tools websites so this is just a sliver of the public's interest.


Web traffic of Farrel "forgotten" Till's website the Skeptical Review for the last 12 months according to Compete

Web traffic of Bibletools.com for the last 12 months according to Compete

Two challenges to the dwindling fan base of atheist Farrell "forgotten" Till

1. Please give us your very best example of a supposed Bible contradiction. No doubt your "best example" can easily shown to be extremely poor - especially given the vast amount of sound evidence supporting the Bible. When presenting your case, please demonstrate that you followed the Bible exegesis procedure given in the web article Basic rules of New Testament Bible exegesis (Although Fee was a New Testament scholar these rules could easily be applied to the Old Testament as well).

If you do not demonstrate that you followed the basic rules of Bible exegesis in your blog post comment(s), your comment(s) will not be published.

Farrel Till to my knowledge never posited a "best example" of an alleged Bible contradition. If he had it would have been very embarrassing to him as a Christian apologist would have shown how utterly weak it was relative the evidence supporting the Bible's truthfulness.

2. Accept our 15 questions for evolutionists debate challenge. You can set up an oral debate which will be recorded and distributed to over 20,000 individuals via our free chat room: Our free chat room

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away." - Jesus

Related posts

Global decline of atheism

Internet atheism: The thrill is gone!


Other resources

Atheism, agnosticism and humanism: Godless religions

Refuting evolution

Evidence for Christianity

More evidence for Christianity

Did Jesus rise from the dead? by Michael Horner

Question Evolution! Campaign resources

Question Evolution! Campaign

15 questions for evolutionists

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 1 - Questions 1-3

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 4–8

Responses to the 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 9-15

Decline of global atheism video