Jump to content
HovindSlantedMouth

How to disprove these creationist claims?

Recommended Posts

The author of these articles claim they have proof to disprove evolution.

My question is reverse, how to disprove the authors claims in the articles?

1. 22 Falsifications of Evolution!

 

2. 11 Major Arguments against Evolution

 

3. Language is proof of God

 

 

Edited by Strange
Links deleted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HovindSlantedMouth said:

My question is reverse, how to disprove the authors claims in the articles?

!

Moderator Note

Why not follow the rules of the forum and present one of the arguments here so it can be discussed? Moved to Speculations. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One could claim that God created everything we can possibly observe just 5 minutes ago and just as it was at that point in time. How could you possibly prove it's incorrect?

Edited by J.C.MacSwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can’t disprove something like that.  The way God is described, omnipotent etc... is by definition outside the bounds of what science can really test and measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 2:24 PM, HovindSlantedMouth said:

The author of these articles claim they have proof to disprove evolution

Many people claim they can disprove evolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2019 at 6:24 AM, HovindSlantedMouth said:

The author of these articles claim they have proof to disprove evolution.

My question is reverse, how to disprove the authors claims in the articles?

It's pretty easy, and it's been done to death. Most of their arguments are strawmen, in that they make a false or misunderstood claim to attack, instead of a more difficult, legitimate claim. For instance, that the creation of proteins is astronomically improbable, therefore it couldn't have happened. Since they mistakenly think the universe is only a few thousand years old, they can't accept that evolution had millions of years to miss before it finally hit. 

Many of the arguments are nitpicking Darwin, as if the theory began and ended with him. They ignore what every scientist knows, that theories are dynamic, changing as new evidence shapes them into better and more accurate predictions. 

And they keep repeating arguments that have been refuted, which is seriously dishonest from an intellectual perspective. I still hear "If we descended from monkeys, why do we still have monkeys?" being spread to ignorant audiences. They study evolution only enough to cherry-pick the parts many don't understand, and then ask questions they don't want answers to. If they really studied evolution sincerely, with an open mind, they would come to the obvious conclusion that there's no other way it could work. Evolution is a fact, and the Theory of Evolution describes how it works, with observational accuracy backed up by more evidence than almost any other theory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2019 at 11:15 AM, J.C.MacSwell said:

One could claim that God created everything we can possibly observe just 5 minutes ago and just as it was at that point in time. How could you possibly prove it's incorrect?

What God are you speaking of?  If the God of biblical creation, the bible says that God cannot lie.  For that God to convince you that you have existed since, for instance, birth, when he only created you five minutes ago, would be a lie.  That God would be lying TO you.  

Edited by nymnpseudo
to activate notification icon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nymnpseudo said:

What God are you speaking of?  If the God of biblical creation, the bible says that God cannot lie.  For that God to convince you that you have existed since, for instance, birth, when he only created you five minutes ago, would be a lie.  That God would be lying TO you.  

So...I guess it's not that one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2019 at 4:44 AM, Phi for All said:

It's pretty easy, and it's been done to death. Most of their arguments are strawmen, in that they make a false or misunderstood claim to attack, instead of a more difficult, legitimate claim. For instance, that the creation of proteins is astronomically improbable, therefore it couldn't have happened. Since they mistakenly think the universe is only a few thousand years old, they can't accept that evolution had millions of years to miss before it finally hit. 

Many of the arguments are nitpicking Darwin, as if the theory began and ended with him. They ignore what every scientist knows, that theories are dynamic, changing as new evidence shapes them into better and more accurate predictions. 

And they keep repeating arguments that have been refuted, which is seriously dishonest from an intellectual perspective. I still hear "If we descended from monkeys, why do we still have monkeys?" being spread to ignorant audiences. They study evolution only enough to cherry-pick the parts many don't understand, and then ask questions they don't want answers to. If they really studied evolution sincerely, with an open mind, they would come to the obvious conclusion that there's no other way it could work. Evolution is a fact, and the Theory of Evolution describes how it works, with observational accuracy backed up by more evidence than almost any other theory. 

When the Catholic Church endorses the theory of Evolution and the BB as not contradictory to creation and some magical sky pixie, it shows the preponderance of evidence for evolution and the BB as both as near certain as any scientific theory can be, are they aware of how it reduces the bible to fairy tale status, and those spouting rhetoric to the contrary, are doing nothing but spouting nonsense.

It also shows in my opinion, how science/cosmology, [even in the view of the Catholic church] has pushed back the need for any supernatural being into near oblivion, well at least 10-43 seconds from oblivion! 

It then of course induces the YEC's and other assorted variety of god botherers, to keep mounting their white chargers and conducting their fruitless campaigns against science. The OP gives some examples of such

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, beecee said:

When the Catholic Church endorses the theory of Evolution and the BB as not contradictory to creation and some magical sky pixie, it shows the preponderance of evidence for evolution and the BB as both as near certain as any scientific theory can be, are they aware of how it reduces the bible to fairy tale status, and those spouting rhetoric to the contrary, are doing nothing but spouting nonsense.

It also shows in my opinion, how science/cosmology, [even in the view of the Catholic church] has pushed back the need for any supernatural being into near oblivion, well at least 10-43 seconds from oblivion! 

It then of course induces the YEC's and other assorted variety of god botherers, to keep mounting their white chargers and conducting their fruitless campaigns against science. The OP gives some examples of such

Like the Monkeys said, "I'm a Believer!"  And I don't see anything in the bible that says Big Bang or Evolution did not happen.  If the God of the bible (Catholic church mentioned above) is to be mentioned, he can do anything any way he wants to (except lie, as noted above.)  In my opinion, people who say the bible and science are opposed do not know sufficient of either.  

Virgin Birth?  Quick examples:  "Many animals can give birth without mating. We have written before about the strange but spectacular phenomenon of virgin births, or "parthenogenesis" as it's known. Some animals are fully asexual and do not need a male to give birth: for instance, some species of whiptail lizards."

"Female Australian giant prickly stick insects will mate with males when it suits them, but they have found ways to repel them so they can have young without any male interference."   http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151216-virgin-births-are-happening-everywhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, nymnpseudo said:

Like the Monkeys said, "I'm a Believer!"  And I don't see anything in the bible that says Big Bang or Evolution did not happen.  If the God of the bible (Catholic church mentioned above) is to be mentioned, he can do anything any way he wants to (except lie, as noted above.)  In my opinion, people who say the bible and science are opposed do not know sufficient of either.  

Virgin Birth?  Quick examples:  "Many animals can give birth without mating. We have written before about the strange but spectacular phenomenon of virgin births, or "parthenogenesis" as it's known. Some animals are fully asexual and do not need a male to give birth: for instance, some species of whiptail lizards."

"Female Australian giant prickly stick insects will mate with males when it suits them, but they have found ways to repel them so they can have young without any male interference."   http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20151216-virgin-births-are-happening-everywhere

Yes, evolution is  an incredibly awesome scenario...thanks for highlighting some of those aspects.

As is a universe literally arising from nothing and cosmology and science....https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328472-000-trying-to-make-the-cosmos-out-of-nothing/

or....https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/

Quote

 In my opinion, people who say the bible and science are opposed do not know sufficient of either.  

People will of course will interpret something so obscurely written as the bible, by obscure men, in an obscure age, to mean about whatever tickles their agenda. I prefer science, the scientific method and reason. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag6fH8cU-MU

 

 

On 2/3/2019 at 2:24 PM, HovindSlantedMouth said:

The author of these articles claim they have proof to disprove evolution.

My question is reverse, how to disprove the authors claims in the articles?

1. 22 Falsifications of Evolution!

 

2. 11 Major Arguments against Evolution

 

3. Language is proof of God

 

 

https://theconversation.com/even-setting-evolution-aside-basic-geology-disproves-creationism-40356

Even setting evolution aside, basic geology disproves creationism

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/

 

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don't hold up

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

 

Hope some of that helps.

Edited by Strange
Links deleted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, beecee said:

Yes, evolution is  an incredibly awesome scenario...thanks for highlighting some of those aspects.

As is a universe literally arising from nothing and cosmology and science....https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328472-000-trying-to-make-the-cosmos-out-of-nothing/

or....https://www.astrosociety.org/publication/a-universe-from-nothing/

People will of course will interpret something so obscurely written as the bible, by obscure men, in an obscure age, to mean about whatever tickles their agenda. I prefer science, the scientific method and reason. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag6fH8cU-MU

 

 

Virgin birth of animals could have been creationist without evolution, or evolution.  

The bible, to the open mind, is not obscure, it is plain.  Whether it is believed or not is the question for the individual, who will see in it, that it is not to be interpreted.  Because, BeeCee, you don't seem to be aware of that part of the bible, I fail to see how you can comment on it as obscure.

If you believe in the singularity as the source of the universe, you will perhaps have asked yourself where THAT singularity came from .. of course the possible answers are many.

Regarding your new scientist link .. 'Nothing' is impossible .. as 'nothing' is absolutely nothing, but, as you and I are both where we are, doing what we are doing, nothing, anywhere, and everywhere, is impossible.

Edited by nymnpseudo
Misplaced comma, added the last two lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, nymnpseudo said:

Regarding your new scientist link .. 'Nothing' is impossible .. as 'nothing' is absolutely nothing, but, as you and I are both where we are, doing what we are doing, nothing, anywhere, and everywhere, is impossible.

The supernatural and paranormal are non scientific scenarios, and more nonsense then possible. But we are getting off topic. This is about disproving the nonsensical claims of various varieties  of creationist, which has been done.

11 minutes ago, nymnpseudo said:

The bible, to the open mind, is not obscure, it is plain.  Whether it is believed or not is the question for the individual, who will see in it, that it is not to be interpreted.  Because, BeeCee, you don't seem to be aware of that part of the bible, I fail to see how you can comment on it as obscure.

I'm well aware of the bible and what it generally entails, and also the many hundreds of interpretations put on the many hundreds of obscure texts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with the theory of relativity, the theory of evolution is the most proven theory we got. The evidence is staggering.

So what you do when someone denies it, is to take your palms up to your ears, press hard, and repeat the word: La

By performing the above action, you are returning the claims you are presented with, with an equally sensible reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, nymnpseudo said:

If the God of biblical creation, the bible says that God cannot lie. 

How do you know that is accurate? Your bible might be mistaken about that. Or the people who wrote it might be lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2019 at 6:44 PM, Phi for All said:

It's pretty easy, and it's been done to death. Most of their arguments are strawmen, in that they make a false or misunderstood claim to attack, instead of a more difficult, legitimate claim. For instance, that the creation of proteins is astronomically improbable, therefore it couldn't have happened. Since they mistakenly think the universe is only a few thousand years old, they can't accept that evolution had millions of years to miss before it finally hit. 

Many of the arguments are nitpicking Darwin, as if the theory began and ended with him. They ignore what every scientist knows, that theories are dynamic, changing as new evidence shapes them into better and more accurate predictions. 

And they keep repeating arguments that have been refuted, which is seriously dishonest from an intellectual perspective. I still hear "If we descended from monkeys, why do we still have monkeys?" being spread to ignorant audiences. They study evolution only enough to cherry-pick the parts many don't understand, and then ask questions they don't want answers to. If they really studied evolution sincerely, with an open mind, they would come to the obvious conclusion that there's no other way it could work. Evolution is a fact, and the Theory of Evolution describes how it works, with observational accuracy backed up by more evidence than almost any other theory. 

I would add that it is a futile task to prove or disprove an assertion to someone who is strongly bound emotionally. Lack of knowledge driven by primitve fear is such a strong motivator that attemtps at coherent discussion are useless in most cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, koti said:

I would add that it is a futile task to prove or disprove an assertion to someone who is strongly bound emotionally. Lack of knowledge driven by primitve fear is such a strong motivator that attemtps at coherent discussion are useless in most cases.

Or even simply bound to the premise that some Bible or other, or some subset of it, is factual. If you agree to allow that premise you can only look for contradictions within the Bible (or said subset of it) to debate. Any other evidence can easily be "proven" logically to be yet another coincidence, and given that nothing in science is absolutely proven, you simply cannot expect to win by bringing science into it, without getting agreement from the outset that the debate will be based on scientific methods.

Edited by J.C.MacSwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
!

Moderator Note

As the OP is not interested in discussion and apparently only posted to promote some Creationist lies, this thread is closed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.