. . . roll-over image links for previews or follow the theme trails by clicking on each image to proceed to the next . . .
Symptomatic of their black-and-white
love to make challenges demanding proof
. Of course, presented with proof, creationists would merely deny the evidence because they are not interested in knowing a truth that does not fit their inculcated religious dogma. Facts can be empirically demonstrated, but no scientific theory
, or any other inference based on induction
can be proven, whereas hypotheses and theories and claimed-to-be-facts can be disproven
. Biological evolution
is a demonstrable fact
upon which theories of evolution are based. The evidence for biological evolution has been pronounced as "overwhelming" by credible experts
in the field. The modern synthesis of evolution represents the best current scientific explanation of the observable facts.
There are NO creation scientists because creationisms is religion and not science, so "creation scientist" is an oxymoron. Not only do creationist not know or comprehend the facts of those areas of science that are related to their creationist obsession, but they attack a strawman version of science or parrot misinformation. Falsifying details and publishing unfounded attacks on scientific facts does not constitute science. No matter what an individual's educational background, fallacious argumentum ad verecundiam pronouncements that run counter to the facts and to the knowledge of credible experts in a field are without any value as science.
is based on application of empirical scientific methodology, creationism is religion based on an ill-founded assumption of Biblical literacy. Creationists have attempted to hijack science in order to strengthen their received, preconceived notions of Biblical inerrancy. They will never succeed in convincing any but the already-deluded because scientific methods have disproven
the Biblical statements that relate to scientific areas. The Bible is an allegorical creation myth followed by a pseudohistorical moral fable, it is not a science text.
Science studies the natural world, that is scientific method can only be applied to the physical, observable, tangible, and measurable. The physical is all that we can know
to exist, even though scientists agnostically concede that the physical may not inhere all of existence. The question of existence beyond the physical belongs to speculative philosophy and theology. Science is religion-neutral and does not
assume that God does not exist. Scientists may privately believe that there is no deity, particularly in view of the fact that science provides far better explanations than "God brought it about by a miracle." However, scientific method can only be religion neutral. Creationists have coined the buzzword "secular" in an attempt to place all scientists in the infidel camp in an association fallacy
Because there is so much evidence for continuing biological evolution (covered by the adopted creationist buzzword microevolution) creationists see nothing to be gained in denying that, for example, bacteria can acquire antibiotic resistance. Creationists do not perceive currently occurring genetic change as a threat because they are obsessed with denying the distant past (biopoiesis and macroevolution) in order create that gap into which they insert the man-invented notion of Special Creation.The referrence to design pays homage to intelligent [sick] design theory
, which is merely creationism in disguise.
The mythical YEC figure of 6,000 years for the age of the Earth is based on Bishop Usher's Bible-based estimate. Science has categorically demonstrated that the Bible is incorrect in its depiction of dates–in effect, disproven. The planet is approximately 4.7 billion years old, no matter how many times ill-informed and biased YECs claim that Usher's date is accurate. Life arose, through abiogenesis or biopoiesis, by 4 billion years ago. Life subsequently evolved under the agency of mechanisms that operate to this day. The dinosaurs went extinct roughly 60 million years before hominids evolved
no matter what misleading lie-oramas are displayed in AiG's expensive but deceitful museum
Creationists attack radiocarbon dating in an attempt to support the unsupportable. No
scientist claims that carbon dating can be applied to dates earlier than 70,000 years ago. Other radioactive isotopes with longer half-lives are employed in obtaining age estimates for older rocks, and such dates are always reported with the range of error indicated. Creationists are typically woefully ignorant of actual science, preferring as they do to parrot the pseudoscientific falsifications on junk tanks
such as AiG
Creationism is only about religion. Creationists and others of religious persuasion make a claim of "Truth" for their beliefs, but they have no good evidential, logical foundation for doing so. This is the reason that the terms "faith" and "belief" are more accurately applied to religious beliefs.
Creationists seem to believe that whatever nonsense they make up about their supposed God will hold true simply because they say so. Such thinking is totally in keeping with the emotionality, obstinate ignorance, and illogic
of their arguments. If God originated science, then the Bible is the received Misleading Pseudoscience for Dummies
text, and God scores a Z- in science.
Creationists, for highly emotional reasons of their own, cannot imagine how life could have arisen from chemicals and subsequently evolved. This is a failure of comprehension, a failure of logic, and deliberate ignorance of established facts. Creationists seem unable to sense purpose to their lives without their being the product of Special Creation. This emotional lack, in addition to manifest and obstinate ignorance about reality, is very sad indeed.
Creationists are typically so illogical that they do not even realize that they are making self-contradictory statements in an attempt to justify emotional beliefs. I suspect that because these individuals desperately want and need to believe that they are the salvation-selected products of Special Creation they are gullible prey for any falsehood or illogical argument that appears to support their indoctrinated beliefs. (Let's be honest and call a stupid argument a stupid argument.) The stupid arguments support creationists' emotional beliefs, so creationists ignorantly fail to detect the illogic.
No matter how passionately an illogical ignorant argument is made, that argument remains utterly without validity. YEC vehemence is really tantamount to bragging about exhibiting stupidity. It is not surprising that many Christians hold YECs in contempt.
Creationists' arguments on religion are highly emotional, their arguments concerning science are falsehoods, their arguments about morality are rigid and bigoted, their views on politics are usually greed-motivated, hubris-filled, and doggedly unperceptive. I believe that YEC
appeal to those who have a cognitive disorder in that they have not attained an internal desire for logic. Further, most creationists of my acquaintance also appear to simply lack mastery of many operations of logic, at least so far as their dogmatic religious beliefs are concerned.
"genetic epistemological" research into the developmental acquisition of cognitive schemas did not proceed beyond the achievement of formal operations by about age eleven. However, beyond those logical schemas acquired in childhood, not all individuals attain the full repetoir of logical operations necessary for critical thinking
. The worldviews of many adults exhibit considerable philosophical tension, and many adults display internally inconsistent, illogical, emotional reasoning fraught with many of the errors found in fallacious arguments
. Religious beliefs, in general, force illogical inconsistencies into the thinking
Labels: creation myths, creationists, critical thinking, fallacies of logic, genetic epistemology, id theory, Jean Piaget, science, scientific method, YEC