Well hopefully a fence sitter can be persuaded with real evidence, but yeah the ultra hard-core fundie is a lost cause and to try and debate, let along discuss the issue is a waste of breathDarth Wong wrote:Normally, we're joking when we make fun of, say, right-wingers who treat opposing data as if it's evil. But it's no joke when you're dealing with a fundie; they literally think that opposing information is evil, ie- it comes from Satan and his worldwide conspiracy of lies. So it's not surprising that they simply ignore it; from their perspective, they are protecting themselves from the lies of Satan. That's why it's so annoying to argue with them; they are consciously resisting new information.
Funny creationist arguments
Moderator: Alyrium Denryle
- Mal_Reynolds
- Youngling
- Posts: 146
- Joined: 2005-10-14 03:09am
Re: Funny creationist arguments
Azazal wrote:These are not mine, they were posted on the JREF (James Randi Educational Foundation) forum - http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=49739
I found some to be funny, others sad, and some just plain mind numbing. Thought the folks here might enjoy for a laugh/cry/headache.
The orginal JREF thread has more and links to yet still more if you want to see the "great" depths of some creationists and their "evidence"
* the scientists say that there's a missing link that there is no animal in between the monkey's and human's evolution thing how can you have a missing link when the whole chain is wrong and the scientists say that there is no way that matter can dissappear we were made with all the matter we need and before the big bang all the matter was in one little ball of ooze and what i want to know is how did that little ball of matter get there? why don't they answer all the questions, just some of them, the ones they want to answer?
* But anyway, I'm just replying on one of your evolution theories, the one about the black peppered moth. I believe that the man that came up with that theory, confessed about gluing those moths to the trees to take that photo, and he ended up going to jail. Correct me if im wrong, but that is what i've been informed.
* You talked about how evolution has been observed by insects becomming resistant to pesticides. Again, this isn't evolution, it is variation. It happens to people all the time, a person that doesn't like the taste of onions, and eats nothing but onions for a month, they will adapt to the taste. They don't evolve taste buds that make onions taste good.
* Don't waste your time with these people (I guess I have a little time to waste). They will never get it. I was amazed at Tim Thompson's mathematical, singularity, general relativity, quantum mechanical... if a/b=c, and carry the 4, then the universe could not literally be born from nothing. NO KIDDING.
* When God created the Earth He created it with age, we know this because of Adam and Eve. They were not two when they were created, they were adults. Also most scientists are now admitting to the fact that evolution did not take place.
* Kent Hovind is not an embarresment to the creation movement, usally when he cannot be refuted, then this is what the evil-lutionist resort to. He is very good friends with the father of the modern young earth creationist movement Henry Morris, so your facts are liar, which I am sure you are aware of.
* Using your own words: "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty". Then why teach these things as "truth" to our impressionable school age children? Evolution of species is a documented fact? What merit does it have then, because a "fact" is only a half-truth? I do not want my children being taught half-truths (lies)
* hey dude. Did George washington exist? were you there to see him? Then all you are doing is relying on books and textbooks to tell you who he was and what he did. Did god exist? You never saw him either. the bible tells you exactly who he is and was nd will always be, but you don't believe in the bible. Why believe the textbooks?
* Person 1: Well, how do creationists know that the Big Bang isn't true? Person 2: Tell me, Matt. If you put a bomb in your room, do you think setting it off would make it clean or dirty? 1) That's easy. A bomb would cause a huge mess. I would have clothes and toys all over the place. Mom wouldn't be happy about that at all. 2) Well, you can think of the Big Bang kind of like a big bomb. Evolutionists think that when this explosion happened things got more organized or straightened up instead of getting more disorganized or messy. 1) That sure doesn't make any sense. Another way we know evolution isn't true is to look at our so-called relatives, the monkeys. Man and animals do have many things in common, two eyes, two ears, and the way we breathe, for example. But if you compare DNA, the instructions inside our body that tell us how to look, of monkeys and men, there are some big differences. For the DNA of a monkey to accidentally change to the DNA of a man would be like saying I accidentally jumped over the Grand Canyon So big bang created everything that looks so beatiful on Earth? I wonder how Earth would look after an atomic bomb, maybe we might get more beautiful. Your logic is sad.
* You are a moron, the geological collum was deposited rapidly and there is petrified trees connecting the layers right side up and upside down. These trees prove the layers were formed rapidly, because the trees conect them together. mabe the roots grew during the flood whitch water level reached above the highest mountian. How is oil and coal made? Roots growing 7000 feet down doesnt dissprove the the rapid formation, mabe during the flood seeds were buried. These layers are not diffrent ages, and how come there is no erosion marks between the layers. I did erosion controll, and underground construction. I am not going to fall for your false science. The geological collum is based on circular reasoning. Your carbon dating is assumed constant, and that is unknown. carbon date a live snail and see what you get 25,000 years.Plus how many super novas do we have, not millions of years worth. The mammonths were froze rapidly (small ice crystals in blood) You would need -300 deg below to freeze the mammoths with unroted food in there stomach, the inside would rot because of their stomach acid hello. There is no proof of anything being consistant, if there was more observations would favor the earth as under 10,00 years old. Go to drdino.com and learn real science.
* archology was founded onproving the bible wrong, yet everything that archologist have found have continued to do the oppisite and has always proven the bible correct.
* AS for evolution and your big bang one question where did the dirt come from? so don't tell people that its not a belief as in a religon.
* You can try to discredit those ''creationist''but it's not working! If you look at the new polls, you will see that the lunatic fringe of atheistic philosophy, which is what EVOLUTION is, and nothing more, is being seriously challenged by THINKING and curious people. Now, all the sudden the degrees of the evolutionist/scientist is becoming a worthless piece of paper when the doubt of a philosophical ''theory'' is being dumped into the recycle bin of YAK! Imagine. Dawkins having to defend his degree based on a false science! Will Oxford call it back in when they discover the value of teaching the false science of evolution is equivalent to a day at Disney World!
* Well there is a few laws you should refer to before spreading that theory around. 1st law of thermal dynamics “matter cannot be created or destroyed”. This means that everything was here from the start, or if you are a creationist, you would believe that it was created by God who would be powerful enough to do anything with this universe.
* Why isnt Abiogenesis, the theory that life spontaneously came into existence from base chemicals completely contradicted by Newton's Second Law of Thermodynamics.
* There hasn't been a single fossil found that represents a transitional animal, an in-between phases, missing link. It has been speculated but never found. We should see those everywhere. Lizards with wings and fish with legs and stuff.
* Adaptation occurs but not evolution! Read the Bible and you will see the truth. Jacob made his cattle copulate before striped rods, and wouldn’t you know but the babies came out striped! From this Biblical evidence, we can safely say that polar bears emerge from brown bears because they are conceived amid all that white snow. Similarly, peacocks probably were big-tailed birds that spent a few generations among colorful flowers while some sharks adapted their coloration from the dark water beneath and sunlight above. Test it for yourselves! However, you should ensure that a righteous man like Jacob performs the experiment, as evolutionists will falsify the data so they can continue living in sinful debauchery without being held to God’s rules. I dare you to post this because it thoroughly disproves your pet theory!
* Evolution is fake. I want evolutionist to explain this. How do grass and trees grow from a small seed (Genesis 1:11). The sky is unreachable and it had to be a creator to that. People dying in their sleep. The Moon, sun, stars, clouds,rainbow,mountains, planets outer space. Why are ya'll celebrating Christmas without knowing the true meaning. It is better to Worship GOD and there is not one, then to be athiest and he is there.
* Another fact is the earth is slowing down at a pretty constant rate. If you go back too far the earth would be spinning so fast that the dinosaurs that text books say were there, would have been flung off the earth.
* You wish you knew what was the truth? Where has all your scientific mummbo jummbo been proven without a doubt? Do you have a time machine? Can you go back and prove one way or the other? How come you think your way is the truth? Have you been smited? Were you made to feel inferior to someone else based upon there obivious unique interpretation of life based upon our only cronological existence?
IOW -- wow. That's a whole lot of stupid.
I play the banjo!
Claim X. Propose evidence for X. Present evidence for Y. If this deception arouses opposition, repeat previous steps with the opposition as subject.
Claim X. Propose evidence for X. Present evidence for Y. If this deception arouses opposition, repeat previous steps with the opposition as subject.