Suppose you could ask a creationist one question that would absolute make them pee in their pants. One that would make them look like an idiot in front of the loyal audience that they usually seem to have in attendance. What would it be?
I’ve been watching some Kent Hovind stuff on Youtube. He’s good. In this clip he turns three university scientists into little girls. I can’t believe these guys didn’t have the wherewithall to go for the jugular. For example, the first question is “Who made God?” Don’t ask a religious fanatic who made God unless you want a lengthy convoluted answer. As if Hovind hadn’t been asked that one before.
You get one question. Think carefully.
Wrong forum, but what’s wrong with, “No one. He’s the alpha and the omega.”? That’s the logical answer. But depending on the type of creationist, you may not get logical answers. Just as not all atheists eat their children, not all creationists dispute natural selection or believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old.
I agree. If you are talking about the concept of “God” or even a god, then “logical” questions mean nothing as you are talking about a supernatural being who is all-powerful.
You might as well talk to believers of ghosts as to how it is possibly physically for spirits to rise from the dead and walk through walls.
*I’m not comparing religious belief with belief in ghosts, but it’s the same principle…
“Does God lie?”
Moving to GD from GQ.
But the answer is very simple. There is no question that will daunt a fervant creationist.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
It’s a mug’s game since they can always say, in answer to a question like, “Why do we have an appendix?” or any of the many imperfections that we have because evolution is by hill-climbing and can only find a local meximum, he will inevitably answer that man cannot know the mind of God. Fine and dandy, but they sure claim to know the mind of God on myriad other questions, such as that he forbids birth control. Or married priests. Ok, that is just one sect, but each one believes it has a perfect take on what God wants all over.
God is supposed to have said, “Thou shalt not kill” or words to that effect. But virtually every war is started with “God on our side”. Or consider Bloody Mary, or the Crusaders. I guess I could go in this mode forever, but I desist.
Exactly. They don’t respond to logic, or facts or anything else; it’s like arguing with a wall.
Actually, scientists recently proposed a function for the appendix. It serves as a safe haven for ‘friendly’ intestinal bacteria and allows the intestines to ‘reboot’ after suffering from a serious intestinal illness which does in the friendly bacteria. Apparently, this came in quite handy in prehistory when population densities were low and you couldn’t just have your roommate help you repopulate your intestinal bacteria. So you see, proof that God exists–even the appendix has a function. Now if the theist can only explain the existence of useless organisms like Britney Spears…
I understand your point but cannot agree. This goes beyond a philosophical argument. The Hovind guy from the clip seems quite science savvy. He knows what to emphasize and what to gloss over. Is there no way to turn this around on him by catching him in a slip and get his house of cards to come tumbling down?
As I’ve read on the Dope, “We’ve got mountains of evidence for this stuff.” If all of it is disputable then maybe he’s got a point after all.
Placing the earth at 6000 years old seems ridiculous. He’s going for 6000 years and we’re going for 4.5 billion and we can’t do any better than that?
Is there not indisputable evidence that the earth is older than 6000 years?
Of course there is. But most of it (like radiocarbon dating) is not easily understood by this guy’s target audience, and is therefore likely to be dismissed by them. Other stuff (like the fact that we can see stars that are more than 6,000 light years away) is just explained by saying that God created the light already most of the way toward the earth. If you want, you can throw in some stuff about God testing people’s faith in Him and seeing if such apparent ‘evidence’ will subvert their godly faith in the Scriptures.
Remember, in the immortal words of Quine, “Any statement can be held true come what may, if we make drastic enough adjustments elsewhere in the system.” You can’t force someone to revise a belief which they are committed to preserving come what may.
You simply cannot stump a Creationist. Dawkins tried it when he gave a speech at Randolph-Macon University against students from Liberty “University”. The end line is always, God is above all laws.
Keep in mind that creationists believe in GOD, and through GOD, anything is possible.
If the earth appears to be 4.5 billion years old, that’s because GOD made it look that way to “test our faith”. That’s right, all this nonsense about carbon dating, continental drift, geological strata, and the red shift of distant galaxies is all an illusion created by GOD to trick some of his children into believing the world is more than 6,000 yrs old, and those who fall for GOD’S scientific lie will BURN IN HELL FOREVER…because, after all, GOD loves you! :rolleyes:
Why do they think the earth is only 6,000 years old? Why only 6,000?
Question? Ha. I don’t even need a question.
“Dude, you talk like a fag, and your shit’s all retarded.”
If you trace back the generations and ages of people as described in the Old Testament, you get the creation of Adam and Eve at around 4000 BC. So it comes from Biblical literalism.
Man, those young earth creationists are insane. Six thousand years? Seriously? Everyone knows the Earth’s almost 6011 years old, and going strong.
By backtracking in the old/new testament. Dawkins attributed it to guessing that the distance from New York to San Fransisco was 700 yards (a factor of one million). A mathematician corrected Dawkins and said the error was on par with guessing that the distance from NY to San Fran was 28 feet.
Looks like my abuse of the Edit Reason box finally backfired on me above, by one character…
It was a mistake and a waste of time for the evolutionists to defend evolution. They should instead have attacked creationism, starting with one of them saying “I have a theory that the universe was created in its current form last Thursday with all biological structures in place and false memories implanted in all humans. This theory is entirely satisfactory and self supporting and all other theories, including those described in Genesis, are therefore stupid.”
After all, this was clearly the creationist’s forum, with the creationist’s audience and he had the chance to prepare his PowerPoint presentations and whatnot. I wouldn’t bother trying to change their minds. I’d settle for just shamelessly mocking them. Putting forth an equally bulletproof creationist theory will do just fine. Hovind’s patter is geared toward willful ignorance of science (fusion can’t pass iron? Wrong-o, idiot) and lame jokes. Don’t dance to his tune. I’d happily sit back and say “Why do you believe the world was created 6,000 years ago when I know for a fact it was created last Thursday? How do I know? Can you prove otherwise?”
-
If evolution doesn’t occur, how did Noah fit 2 (or 7) of every species, including dinosaurs, on that boat?
-
If the Bible is the inerrant Word of (an omniscient, omnipotent) God, why are there so many scientific errors and contradictions?
Of course, the first would be answered by saying that all of the dinosaurs went extinct in the millennium or so before the flood; and *micro-*evolution is possible, so there weren’t all that many species; and God helped out a lot in other, supernatural ways.
Come to think of it, these people can rationalize anything.