|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 01/07/2008 : 22:50:47
|
|
Why do people laugh at creationists? is a series of YouTube videos:Much of it may be old-hat to many here, but some of the creationists are rather entertaining in their misplaced certainty.
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 05:35:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Part 1 |
Why would this creationist ever claim to know that water was non-existent elsewhere in the solar system/universe? Not a well thought out statement of fact if you ask me. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 05:53:58 [Permalink]
|
BS said:
| Not a well thought out statement of fact if you ask me. |
You have just described all statements of "fact" ever uttered by any creationist. Well done!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 05:59:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
BS said:
| Not a well thought out statement of fact if you ask me. |
You have just described all statements of "fact" ever uttered by any creationist. Well done!
|
Still rambling I see, dude. I thought you were going to work on that? |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 01/08/2008 06:01:41 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 09:07:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Why would this creationist ever claim to know that water was non-existent elsewhere in the solar system/universe? Not a well thought out statement of fact if you ask me. |
Well, all the creationists featured in this clips seemed to speak pretty confidently about things, even though in virtually every case, they're stupefyingly wrong. I mean, Honvind's suggestion that some ice comet raced towards earth and then broke apart only to land on the poles (because of the earth's magnetic field) and freeze mammoths where they stood is comically stupid.
And the notion that "water stops X-rays" is so far removed from reality that it is hard to imagine Hovind really believes what he's saying. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 10:57:58 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Cuneiformist |
| Well, all the creationists featured in this clips seemed to speak pretty confidently about things, even though in virtually every case, they're stupefyingly wrong. |
I only had a chance to briefly view Part 1 so I will have to wait and comment on the others at the appropriate time. In the first one the narrator states that a search for water/water vapor elsewhere in the solar system/universe is a vain search. It was my understanding that this was implying that water was non-existent in the universe other then on our planet. I might not laugh at this fellow but as a creationist myself I would be left scratching my head. My question(s) would follow:
1. How could you possibly know that water is non-existent in the rest of the solar system/universe?
2. And even if it is non-existent what would that prove in the creation/abiogenesis debate?
If the rest of these parts follow suit to part 1 then the job was made very easy for the naturalist.
I mean, Honvind's suggestion that some ice comet raced towards earth and then broke apart only to land on the poles (because of the earth's magnetic field) and freeze mammoths where they stood is comically stupid.
And the notion that "water stops X-rays" is so far removed from reality that it is hard to imagine Hovind really believes what he's saying. |
I have heard of Honvind, mostly on this site, but I am not up to speed on what he professes. What is his point if a comet did freeze mammoths where they stood? |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 11:32:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
| Originally posted by Cuneiformist |
1. How could you possibly know that water is non-existent in the rest of the solar system/universe?
2. And even if it is non-existent what would that prove in the creation/abiogenesis debate?
If the rest of these parts follow suit to part 1 then the job was made very easy for the naturalist. |
Well, we don't get to see all of the creationist stuff. Mostly, the clips pick on this kid (seen in the first part) and Hovind. But I have no idea what the kid's full arguments are. Obviously water being unique to earth is key to his argument but I can't imagine why. And it is almost certainly wrong!
I mean, Honvind's suggestion that some ice comet raced towards earth and then broke apart only to land on the poles (because of the earth's magnetic field) and freeze mammoths where they stood is comically stupid.
And the notion that "water stops X-rays" is so far removed from reality that it is hard to imagine Hovind really believes what he's saying. |
I have heard of Honvind, mostly on this site, but I am not up to speed on what he professes. What is his point if a comet did freeze mammoths where they stood? |
Well again we aren't shown the full argument. My guess is with this argument, he can point to a young earth. But the rebuttal (which anyone with a basic understanding of science should be able to see) utterly destroys him. Watch the parts and you'll see just how miserably wrong Hovind is in every possible way! |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 11:51:15 [Permalink]
|
| How can anyone come to the conclusion that X-rays dont penetrate water? Every 1st grade student knows that people are made of water and x-rays go right through people. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 11:52:46 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Cuneiformist |
| Mostly, the clips pick on this kid (seen in the first part) and Hovind. |
So it sounds like to me the series would be better represented with the title, "Why people laugh at some kid and Kent Hovind?" |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 12:12:48 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
So it sounds like to me the series would be better represented with the title, "Why people laugh at some kid and Kent Hovind?"
|
But they're pretty much representative, bill. If all creationist arguments weren't pathetic and laughable, you might have a point. But as everyone knows, they very much are.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 01/08/2008 12:13:16 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 12:21:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
I have heard of Honvind, mostly on this site, but I am not up to speed on what he professes. What is his point if a comet did freeze mammoths where they stood?
|
I think the thing with Hovind, Bill, is that he is a pious fraud (one who imagines that lying for his religion is justified for the greater good, despite the command not to "bear false witness" in the Ten Commandments) and an ignoramus. His knowledge of science is nil, his intellect is wanting, but his ego is huge.
Hovind seems to see a need for reinterpreting the Bible in order to make it just a tad more literally believable, as with his rejection of a flat earth, but his own ego drives him to create his own ridiculous "Hovind Theory" version of the creation myth, as with the sphere of water (ice?) "orbiting" the earth, the ice meteor, etc. But he can't be bothered with little contradictions such as whether or not the water was in contact with the atmosphere, despite the fact that the two "possibilities" would have enormously different, and mutually canceling, implications. Essentially, Hovind spins a silly and transparently ludicrous new tale simply for the "wow" factor.
The kid whose video clips started and ended the "Why do people laugh at creationists?" series has ideas that contradict Hovind (where would Hovind's magnetically-guided ice meteor have come from in a waterless universe?), as well as sound scientific knowledge. His tactic is simply to spins lies and insist that science is a crock.
The ID guys who were quoted simply made false statements and completely fabricated numbers regarding probabilities. There's no real difference between them and Hovind, except they are more cagey, use "sciency" terms, and don't fill in the gaps they say they see with details, aside from their assumption of a "designing agency."
What's consistent between all of these Creationists is the use of pious fraud. But who's to blame them? Logically, lies are the only way to attempt a "rational" explanation of the origins of the earth and life when that explanation contradicts hundreds of years of hard-won scientific knowledge.
In my opinion, such various and conflicting packs of lies will continually be told by many of those who feel the facts of nature are an affront to their religion. It would be much easier for them to simply state that their beliefs rest upon faith alone, than to pretend that their creation myth is based upon rationality. In the gladiatorial arena of science, all these guys are unarmed fighters, and will continue to make fools of themselves.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 01/08/2008 15:40:09 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 12:21:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
| Originally posted by Cuneiformist |
| Mostly, the clips pick on this kid (seen in the first part) and Hovind. |
So it sounds like to me the series would be better represented with the title, "Why people laugh at some kid and Kent Hovind?"
|
Well, as I noted, there are other people shown as well, including Ray Comfort, well known for asserting that the banana was the atheist's nightmare. And it's not like and many of the arguments seen in these clips are unique to them!! |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 12:38:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by Bill scott
| Originally posted by Cuneiformist |
| Mostly, the clips pick on this kid (seen in the first part) and Hovind. |
So it sounds like to me the series would be better represented with the title, "Why people laugh at some kid and Kent Hovind?"
|
Well, as I noted, there are other people shown as well, including Ray Comfort, well known for asserting that the banana was the atheist's nightmare. And it's not like and many of the arguments seen in these clips are unique to them!!
|
Even the creationist's position has it's own "Al Gore(s)" who with their pious and hypocritical antics make themselves easy targets for their naysayers. I have never heard of Ray Comfort. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 12:45:50 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by HalfMooner |
| What's consistent between all of these Creationists is the use of pious fraud. But who's to blame them? Logically, lies are the only way to attempt a "rational" explanation of the origins of the earth and life when that explanation contradicts hundreds of years of hard-won scientific knowledge. |
Yes. Please go further on what you know on the origins of the earth and life itself. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 12:48:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by Bill scott
So it sounds like to me the series would be better represented with the title, "Why people laugh at some kid and Kent Hovind?"
|
But they're pretty much representative, bill. If all creationist arguments weren't pathetic and laughable, you might have a point. But as everyone knows, they very much are.
|
Yes. And please share with us on what you know on the origin of the earth. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 13:02:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Even the creationist's position has it's own "Al Gore(s)" who with their pious and hypocritical antics make themselves easy targets for their naysayers. I have never heard of Ray Comfort. |
I think any Creationist is an easy target for naysayers. There simply isn't a valid argument for Creationism, particularly of the Young Earth variety.
In any event, from the sounds of it you sort of have your head in the sand as far as, er, mainstream Creationism goes. Hovind, Comfort, Kirk Cameron, Lee Strobel-- these guys are the one trumpeting the arguments for Creationism nowadays. And again: the arguments discussed in this clips are entirely consistent with mainstream Creationism. |
| Edited by - Cuneiformist on 01/08/2008 13:03:41 |
|
|
 |
|
Why do people laugh at creationists?
