Tag Archives: Creationism

Bill Nye IS The Science Guy

Phew. Bill, we were wrong to doubt you. We thought your inexperience in debates and of creationism, your lack of background in biology or geology, and the slippery dishonesty of Ken Ham, playing to a home crowd, would cause you an embarrassment. Not a bit of it.

You were superb. You stayed on message, you remained polite throughout, you were respectful of differing beliefs, and your natural charisma were too much for the nervous, repetitive and increasingly defensive Ham. The presentation of facts, pitched just right for the layman, was a continuous assault, not just on your opponent, but on the audience’s preconceptions of what science is, distorted as those are by creationism.

Continue reading

The Null Hypothesis: A rational basis for scepticism

This was posted as a response to this blog, Raised by ‘Theological Conspiracy Theorists’: How I Lost my Faith, concerning a former Young Earth Creationist who lost her faith due to uncovering the absurd lies that movement makes about reality. The author betrayed signs of missing religion – understandable, given her whole life has been steeped in it. I attempted to give some advice on how to stay the course and accept her scepticism (I used the American spelling below in view of the audience). The last line was thrown in because the likelihood is the author was hanging on to faith for emotional and moral, not intellectual, reasons.

Subsequent responses are reproduced from godofevolution.com with kind permission by Tyler Francke.

 

“I’m only just starting to claw my way out of deep, angry skepticism back toward religion in general.”

Why not try calm, rational skepticism? Religion has lied to you once, and so it’s quite possible it’ll continue to lie to you.

While YEC is absurdly wrong, take a look at the truth claims even ‘mainstream’ religion makes. Cutting right to the heart of the matter, let’s examine the resurrection. Note that in science, when making a null hypothesis, we use the most likely answer, then attempt to disprove it.

Thus, in order of increasing likelihood, the resurrection was:

1) Jesus rising from the dead by divine intervention,

2) Jesus arising from the dead due to being an alien, or use of alien technology,

3) Someone made it all up, because no religious figure worth his salt in those days didn’t have a resurrection myth e.g. Osiris, Mithras etc.

Dispassionately examine the evidence for this and then decide which is the most likely answer.

It’s perfectly possible to live a fulfilled, moral and loving life without a trace of religious observance. We are a moral species, it comes from within.

Continue reading

Creationist limericks #2

More limericks – I’m on a bit of a roll!

With views from a previous century
creationist knowledge is quite rudimentary.
Despite our groans,
They believe the Flintstones
is a documentary.

The National Trust is a laughing stock,
in their attempt to turn back the clock,
Giving credence to nonsense,
must weight on their conscience
Yet our complaints to them come as a shock?

The Trust buckled and took the money,
But the stonewalling is no longer funny,
Noah’s Flood has no place,
In a factual space
Anymore than the Easter Bunny.

The National Trust cannot be fussed,
about the truth of the age of Earth’s crust,
Their reputation in tatters
Fact no longer matters
They’re a Trust we can no longer trust.

In the Causeway visitors’ complex
An exhibit promotes young Earth bollocks,
Many times they’ve been told,
it’s not 6,000 years old,
It’s thousands of upended Daleks?

Creationist limericks #1

Here’s my first instalment of limericks to do with creationism at the Giant’s Causeway and elsewhere.

Of the Giants Causeway formation,
an audio exhibit does say,
though their minds are deluded,
some nutjobs concluded
the debate continues today….

Creationists hate good scientists,
with their adherence to reason and fact.
“They’re just showing defiance
to God with their science”
even though their own story is quite whacked.

The National Trust were so foolish,
To Caleb they did consult,
Paying lipservice to dogma,
about how molten magma
formed hexagonal pillars of basalt.

Are creationists really as stupid,
as they appear at first glance?
Ken Ham’s nonsense they swallow,
Yet of science they wallow
in a state of total ignorance.

Betrayal of Trust : The National Trust promotes Young Earth Creationism

I’ve not been blogging much recently, as I’ve been rather busy with this – I just wanted to let you know that the campaign to remove a creationist display from the Giant’s Causeway Interpretive Centre is ongoing, and want to keep it in the public eye to shame the National Trust into removing it. A review of the current situation is available here on our group. We’d appreciate your support!

The National Trust are currently in a state of review (and some would say, denial) of the offending exhibit. Meanwhile, they have abdicated their responsibility as a public educator by allowing it to remain in place. The exhibit states “Young Earth Creationists believe that the earth was created some 6000 years ago” and “This debate continues today for some people, who have an understanding of the formation of the earth which is different from that of current mainstream science”. There is no ‘mainstream’ science and ‘fringe’ science, only science and non-science (or ‘nonsense’ for short).

Not only is this a stain on the National Trust’s reputation as a public educator, but it is an embarrassment to Northern Irish citizens and most Christians (the tract states this viewpoint is Biblically derived).

Details of the offending exhibit are on our ‘About’ page, including an audio recording that amounts to an advertisement for Young Earth Creationism, the only religious view to be represented in the facility. The National Trust still seem to think our complaint extends to the historical discussions, which is not so – the history of science always has a place.

What we do not accept is that the display is appropriate, representative, or possibly legal, under terms laid down in the Belfast Agreement. We are not attacking religion either; some of our most vocal group members are Christians, putting the lie to our opponents’ argument that this is a matter of science v religion. It is not. It is a matter of reality v fantasy.

This is a full review of the matter so far – feel free to join the group and add your voice to those asking the National Trust to explain themselves:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/CausewayCampaign/280560768710266/

Creationism : Crushed by the burden of proof

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…..