News:

Actually sport it is a narrative

Main Menu

Help! Creationist Argument

Started by kelltrill, April 06, 2010, 01:41:47 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Cecilie

Quote from: "Davin"
Quote from: "Cecilie"What's the image on the bottom? Can't see it. It's probably a smiley face of some sort.
Just a random "Obvious Troll is Obvious" image.
Ah!
The world's what you create.

_7654_

Hi :-) There is a small problem with that, and it has to do with plate tectonics :-) So the tree dies and is fossilized in a few million years, the layers of now sedimentary rock where strongly rippled by the forces induced by the slow motion of the tectonic plates. And it is not an unknown geological event, that these ripples can fold over, to an upside down or near to that position , with the fossilized tree in them. Now you have your tree growing up side down with younger layers of rock on to of it, if you are not careful enough :-) Hope that cleared this mesmerizing find.

Check types of folds:
http://courses.missouristate.edu/EMante ... truct.html
check Recumbent fold here:
http://courses.missouristate.edu/EMante ... overturned


http://www.bgs.ac.uk/eqr/GeoD_Structures.htm

fazFwQo83

I've seen this line of argument before. They misuse scientific "fact" to try "prove" their argument. The Black Hebrews are a good example of this. Basically they say:

1. If homo sapiens originated in Africa, and
2. Adam was the first man, then
3. Adam must have been a black man, therefore
4. We are the chosen people.

See how the misuse of a single scientific fact combined with misinterpretation of the bible, not to mention complete ignorance of 60 000 years of cultural development that separates homo sapiens from Israelites, can lead them to this world-view that "we are the chosen one's". It's quite a leap but try tell them that.

As far as sounddoctrine.com goes, they say things like: "In our observation only a small percentage of species actually go extinct. Most of them proliferate." as part of a response to the question "Why is Evolutionary development of the species a bunk theory?" If I didn't know any better, I would try think of all the species that have gone extinct to refute this. But really, this is futile, as there are so many. Here's what Wikipedia has to say: "... it is estimated that 99.9% of all species that have ever existed are now extinct." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction

So they make provably false statements that kinda sound o.k (and there's a lot of them) or statements that you can't disprove and use that as a basis for "proof". But when you examine them they have no real foundation. Like "the principle of positive fact". Basically, if the universe was created then it must have been created by ... God. They are basically using a positive fact (the fact that we exist) to "prove" an inferred statement, without giving any evidence whatsoever as to the inferred part of the statement. It's like a murder suspect saying: "I pay my taxes, therefore I couldn't have possibly committed this murder." Huh? Thats some fuzzy logic there buddy.

The problem is, they feel as if they have to attribute creation to something, so if science can't tell them then they perceive it as "useless" and end up believing in things with no foundation whatsoever. It's sad really. The worst is when they say: "Well, obviously God exists!" What do you mean "obviously"? No proof whatsoever, yet it's "obvious" to them? It's not obvious, otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation.