Top Ten Creationist Arguments Video

Produced by The Thinking Atheist (as opposed to the unthinking), comes the “Top Ten Creationist Arguments” video. While hardly complete, because let’s face it, pretty hard to get all those arguments and rebuttals into one video, it’s one of the better ones on YouTube. I would simply add to rebuttal on the argument on “If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?”  that we share a distant cousin with chimps and therefore humans went their way and chimps went their way. We didn’t morph directly from chimps thereby taking over the species.

Some of these arguments, you’ll notice, have more to do with emotions and gut reactions. Such as why address the Hitler accusation? Because of eugenics. Creationists love the idea that eugenics was embraced by scientists who also accepted evolution, or rather they used evolution to justify eugenics. While I’m not an expert on the history of eugenics I can certainly agree there is a history of abuses in the name of science–and religion! The question is, what weeds out the abuse or the invalid science? Well, more science. See science is peer reviewed and hotly debated. Science can change based upon new observable evidence or a review of the work being presented.

The Bible can’t do that (though the interpretations sure do seem to change). If the Bible says to stone homosexuals, well, what do you do with that? God’s book can’t be wrong, we can’t just scratch it out.Now if a Nazi scientist says homosexuality is abnormal and bad for the population, other scientists can point to observable evidence, statistics, etc that shows the contrary. The debate may be long and vicious but there is an allowance for the Nazi science, or should I say pseudoscience, to be ruled out as either invalid or outright fraud. With the Bible, one can’t simply scratch out pieces of text that don’t make sense or are incompatible with modern law and morals.

I never like pushing the Hitler button anyways–I really try to avoid it because it’s such a last ditch effort to prove a point. I mean hell, why not throw in other tyrants from the past. I mean Stalin was in control of mandated atheism? Does it make God  or lack of a god true? No, it just means Stalin was a dick and that from experience we know freedom of religion is best. We should also realize that with these tyrants, science had its hands tied and often had to come up with the results the dictator wanted to hear.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *