This is a piece I put together to demonstrate the mountain of evidence creationists, and by that term I mean young Earth creationists in this article, must climb to be credible.
Why are people so dismissive of creationists? It’s for much the same reason people are dismissive of alien abductee claimants, or Illuminati conspiracy theorists; there is absolutely no supporting evidence for it, and absolutely mountains of evidence that blow it out of the water.
I’ve posted this segment several times and have yet to receive one single response to explain any facet of it, when creationism has to explain every last piece to be credible:
If you believe the Genesis account of creation is true, I have bad news for you. It isn’t. I could cite how Lord Kelvin calculated that the Earth had to cool for 20 – 40 million years minimum before it could sustain life, and how Edwin Hubble’s demonstration of the distance of the Andromeda galaxy at around 2 million light years means the Universe is at least that old (since calculated at 13.7 billion years due to the cosmic background microwave radiation) which create problems for the first ‘days’ of creation, light separating from dark etc.
And it doesn’t stop there – we know from geology not only that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old, with the first traces of life appearing at 3.5 billion years, and the first complex life around 500 million years, but that the early Earth atmosphere was anoxic (had no free oxygen) and even when chemosynthetic life appeared (using hydrogen sulphide or similar instead of light as an energy source as plants would), producing oxygen as a waste product, free iron immediately bound to it, ensuring that it took eons for free oxygen, and thus ozone, to reach levels in the atmosphere that could support large aerobes like our selves – if we had appeared on the 6th day, we would have died of asphyxiation before the unfiltered UV light killed us.
There is no evidence in the geological record for a global flood, or a recent (i.e. during the time of the human species) mass extinction not attributable to an ice age, but there is lots of evidence for hominid ancestors of increasing similarity to ourselves evolving in Africa and radiating out across the planet in waves – we’ve even discovered archaeic human remains and DNA of non-Homo sapiens sapiens such as Neanderthals, Denisovans, Homo floresiensis and the Red Deer people, many of which walked the earth at the same time we did, and may have interbred with our species (in reality, they were different sub-species).
So in short, even if you can explain away evolution, the antiquity of all sorts of ancient life, notably dinosaurs, and radiometric dating, you’ve still got the laws of physics, including those of thermodynamics and the speed of light, to explain.
At some point you have to ask yourself – “Gosh, we have to perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to make our views fit the facts” – and realise that your position is untenable.
Note I have made no arguments against God – that is beyond the remit of science, being untestable, only the Biblical account of creation.
P.S. I forgot about magnetic pole reversal, paleobiology (diatoms and pollen etc), the rain forest they discovered under the ice in Antarctic, cratering on the Moon tied to it being the same age as the Earth, plate tectonics and marine fossils in the Himalayas…..