If you look at the universe and study the universe, what you find is that there is no evidence that we need anything other than the laws of physics and the other laws of science to explain everything we see. There's absolutely no evidence that we need any supernatural hand of god. -- Lawrence Krauss, World-Renowned Physicist
There is probably no other notion in any field of science that has been as extensively tested and as thoroughly corroborated as the evolutionary origin of living organisms. -- Encyclopedia Britannica
FAITH. No one word personifies the absolute worst and most wicked properties of religion better than that. Faith is mind-rot. It’s the poison that destroys critical thinking, undermines evidence, and leads people into lives dedicated to absurdity. It’s a parasite regarded as a virtue. -- PZ Myers
Religion is the antithesis of science, an anesthetic for the mind that disables critical thought and encourages the acceptance of inanity as fact, and wishful thinking as evidence. -- PZ Myers

Monday, June 10, 2013

Creationists, are you able to defend magical creationism without attacking evolution by natural selection?

My point is evidence against something is not evidence for something else. When you say evolution is false that doesn't mean magical creationism is true.

There is of course no evidence against evolution but if we wanted to pretend evolution has some big problem, that would not be evidence for anything else. You have to be able to defend your magical creationism without attacking evolution. Can you do that? Do you want to try? Go ahead and defend your magical creation out of nothing without once mentioning anything about evolution.


I asked this question at the Yahoo Answers religion section. So far in a website infested with creationist retards there has been no answers. I'm not surprised. If there's any answers later that are not too insane I will copy and paste them to this post for your entertainment.

No comments:

Post a Comment