It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Top 10 Creationist Arguments

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Top 10 Creationist Arguments.... BUSTED!




Once again we see a review of the typical arguments of the creationists.... but this time refuted in a concise and informative video. Enjoy!




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   


Since it was SO popular, here's an encore with even more creationist arguments.

Enjoy!



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Those are all such poor arguments, by scientific standards, lol.

Reminds me of when someone told me that god sends us to hell because refusing his word is like your spouse cheating on you.

Meanwhile, I'm like, "But ... some people can forgive. And anyway ... that doesn't mean your spouse has to endure an eternity of torture and anguish. It just means they won't be with you anymore. But they COULD, in theory, find someone else."

Which isn't the same with god because, according to the bible, you can't just find another god's heaven.

----------------------

Or the argument that god has the right to do whatever he wants. Why? Because if you're a potter, and you make a pot, and you decide to make it a toilet, the pot has no choice in the endeavor.

And I was like, "If the pot I made could feel emotions ... and somehow managed to communicate with me ... why would I put it through such torture if it doesn't like the circumstances? Wouldn't that just make me terrible?"


---------------------

This is why I prefer to focus more logical scenarios, that my mind can entertain. But at the end of the day, I know there is no proof of which, at least; none that I've come to embrace as scientific.

The only proof I could have, if not scientific, is subjective embrace.



And while I try to remain understanding to all things, opting for not imposing myself upon anyone else. I sincerely hope that others have the common decency of not trampling my ass. (Verbally or physically.)



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Some evolutionists aren't that bright either:




posted on May, 19 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by SentientBeyondDesign
Those are all such poor arguments, by scientific standards, lol.

Reminds me of when someone told me that god sends us to hell because refusing his word is like your spouse cheating on you.


Indeed many zealots present truly bizarre arguments.

For an amusing yet sad review of such things collected from the internet.... check here: fstdt.com...



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


I found this video a few months ago, absolutely love it.

Creationism likes to pretend they can stand on the level and debate evolution but really there is no debate within the scientific community and there are no claims made in favor of Creation that have any scientific merit.

Star and Flag.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


It's true, sadly enough some of the defenders of evolution aren't very articulate, unlike the passionate car-salesman preachers we see on TV that almost oversell the Gospel.

Either way they the evolutionists have the facts on their side, the issue is that real evolutionary scientists are too busy with real science to bother debating Creationists and their bunk.

[edit on 19-5-2010 by Titen-Sxull]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 09:42 PM
link   
The Thinking Atheist has many funny things to show


There is also the "If Atheists Ruled the World" video which is funny to
www.youtube.com...



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Some creationist arguements are better than others. Of course the OP video is lumping in all creationists into one strawman. Of the arguements presented and presented, I think three are at least worthy of debate:

1)Carbon Dating. I think it is fair and reasonable to debate about the accuracy of dating methods. If (big if) the dating methods were dubious then there would be cause to seriously question evolution. As the video shows though there are a wide variety of dating methods which are concidered reliable.

2)Proving Evolution. It is incorrect for a creationist to claim that evolution hasn't been proven or can't be proven. I is fair though to put that proof under scrutiny. I think it holds up to that scrutiny.

4)Human Eye / Irriducible Complexity. The exisitance of the eye is not proof in itself against evolution as there are theories to explain it and evidence to back it up. However it is something any theory of evolution would need to explain and worthy of debate.

To add to these I would at two more areas:

Convergent Evolution. The video showed similarity our eye and the cuttlefish's eye but didn't go into the fact that these evolved seperatly. If anything I would use this as proof that evolution isn't random but I can see how a creationist legitimatly use it as evidence of the greater plan of the creator.

Lateral Evolution. Where genes are not inherited directly from an ancestor but passed between different evolutionary paths. This is an even more recent area of research. Again, just because evolution doesn't have a proven answer for it (one explanation is retro-viruses) doesn't automatically prove it was god and therefore disproves all evolution. But by the same token it is worthy of reasoned debate.


The other arguements commonly used by creationists are either misrepresentations of evolution for demagogistic rhetoric

The second video I think had less to do with creationism and more to do religion bashing I think. Not something I would use in respectable debate.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


It's true, sadly enough some of the defenders of evolution aren't very articulate, unlike the passionate car-salesman preachers we see on TV that almost oversell the Gospel.



What, are you kidding?

I love those guys. They're always good for some laughs.






posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by SentientBeyondDesign
Those are all such poor arguments, by scientific standards, lol.

Reminds me of when someone told me that god sends us to hell because refusing his word is like your spouse cheating on you.


Indeed many zealots present truly bizarre arguments.

For an amusing yet sad review of such things collected from the internet.... check here: fstdt.com...

Thanks, I did enjoy the videos. I found myself nodding and smiling.
As for the link, plenty of laughs, with the occasional shudder.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by BlankSlate
 


My favorite creationist argument of all time is easily the "Atheists nightmare" a.k.a "Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron make complete asses of themselves w/ Bananas"



Second is obviously the Peanut Buter man !



At first I laughed for hours. Then I realized humanity is fu....

3rd is "crocoduck". Another Kirk gem.

I should mention these are real. They really thought these were good arguments when they made these videos. Ray did admit to screwing up when he found out the banana he is holding was domesticated banana. ... I will give you a hint .

Google "Wild Banana"


[edit on 19-5-2010 by nophun]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   
I enjoyed the video, but it still has that smugness that I usually associate with atheism. Some of the arguments were dismissive and could have been done better and more informatively.

I used to profess atheism but it was mostly just because I was tired of everyone shoving God in my face with no explanation.

Personally I am deist, and mainly want to post here just to point out that disproving creationism(which is painlessly easy, btw) does not support the idea that there is no God. Evolution and God can coexist quite harmoniously, and I can't understand why these people, if they believe in an omnipotent God, can't just accept evolution as a beautiful part of that God's plan.

Atheism isn't supported by any scientific facts either.



[edit on 19-5-2010 by thedarklingthrush]

[edit on 19-5-2010 by thedarklingthrush]



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedarklingthrush

Atheism isn't supported by any scientific facts either.



There is no scientific evidence for a god. Why would science need to back up Atheism ?
Atheism is making no huge claim here. The claim is yours, you must show the proof.



posted on May, 19 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by thedarklingthrush
 




Atheism isn't supported by any scientific facts either.


Creationist beliefs are in violation of a lot of scientific facts while atheism is in violation of no scientific facts.

Atheism isn't a scientific conclusion anyway, though certainly the lack of scientific evidence in support of a creator or God helps some atheists reach their decision. Atheism is merely the lack of belief that deities exist, its far less smug than going around proclaiming that one's beliefs are absolute fact even after they've been proven wrong many many many many times over the way Creationists do. Generally that religious zealotry, circular logic and downright ignorance is what makes some atheists and evolution supporters so smug. Think of it as an equal and opposite reaction.

[edit on 19-5-2010 by Titen-Sxull]



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by nophun
 


I've actually watched the entire video that the peanut butter "argument" is from. It's truly horrendous.



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by thedarklingthrush
 


Atheism is created from the absence of evidence of a god/gods. Pretty silly to ask for evidence to support it. And yes, nowadays God and evolution can coexist...simply because every time science makes leaps in our understanding of our world and the universe, the religious types fight tooth and nail, some still do today, but the religious folks who don't want to look like intellectually deficient fools simply change the goal posts.."Well God could have kick started evolution"
Changing the goal posts like i said, this sort of tactic has happened for centuries and will continue to i imagine.



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper
reply to post by nophun
 


I've actually watched the entire video that the peanut butter "argument" is from. It's truly horrendous.

I tried to watch it in full, I really did. I made it as far as that lady in the court house lying like a rug. I don't know whats worst the makers of the film or the many people that buy that #.

Basically all young earth creationist arguments are really bad. Kent Hovind and Ken Ham are most likely the worst. If your "Theory" needs pretty much every field of science to be wrong you should probably stfu and go back to school.

[edit on 20-5-2010 by nophun]



posted on May, 20 2010 @ 11:56 PM
link   
I think George Carlin got it right...RIP!




posted on May, 21 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by nophun

Originally posted by thedarklingthrush

Atheism isn't supported by any scientific facts either.



There is no scientific evidence for a god. Why would science need to back up Atheism ?
Atheism is making no huge claim here. The claim is yours, you must show the proof.



Oh please, the claim THERE IS NO God is just as faith based as there IS GOD. The complexity we see is just as unlikely to have happened by chance as it is to have been created by an old guy with a white beard...time to for humanity to grow up, say we don't know and look with fresh eyes. For science go out of it's way to show why DNA does not look "intended" is alarming psychologically, to me anyway, when it is obvious.

We can extrapolate, as creatures who DO create things, to the world around, that things work together quite nicely. I don't argue perfection, but that is the way it looks. notice I am NOT saying that God created Adam and Eve and other such NONSENSE.

The Best arguments I have heard against purpose and design "well, there could be lots of universes totally different from us" , "we are just an anomaly" and "well, if there is a God, he is sadistic"...all arguments that make me think, but nothing that refutes the obvious design.

The NATURE of a creator can be debated elsewhere and there is plenty of room to slam the Gods of modern and ancient religions, but what we see is clear no matter how far out we look and how deep we go...something started this and we are not the first to think and be intelligently aware.

[edit on 21-5-2010 by SmokeandShadow]



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join