Atheists are Deluded!?

This is hilarious! Thanks go out to David Van Allen for finding it.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hey Guys,

This blog is great "silly Christian bait". Fortunately, not every Christian is an idiot.

I listened to a bit of the linked presentation. The talented person who created it was nice enough not to do any research prior to completing his work. This makes the job of the not so idiotic Christian easier.

The speaker in a sweetly condescending tone of voice (which only helps with "debunking" him) builds straw man arguments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man This also helps greatly.

It's much more difficult to answer real questions than it is to answer those which are really just veiled insults with nothing behind them.

So let's answer a couple of these points. Of course I won't waste much of my time doing so because I am well aware those who glory in such questions aren't actually interested in the answers.

The God Delusion - http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/1127dawkins.asp

Radiometric dating - http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp

Distant stars in a "young" universe - http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp

Drug resistance - http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i1/superbugs.asp

Evolution or Natural Selection - http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/selection.asp

Origin of Life - http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/origin.asp

OH hey... just look for whatever science and consistency problems you think there is or you may have heard about here - http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp

Understand that I've been where you are. It's amazing how smart I thought I was until I realized I had been taught WHAT to think instead of HOW to think.

Silly little question which is all but meaningless but does offer an interesting thought process. What did the first cell that could reproduce sexually reproduce with?

People have mocked the purity of God and His just judgment since the beginning. There have always been people twisting the Bible to say things that it doesn't (believers and non-believers are guilty of this). And there have always been false converts who don't even know it.

God is inescapable. You will die. And after that you will stand alone to account for your life. You can pile wrath up for yourself or you can realize you are spiritually bankrupt. You can pretend like all the holes in Evolutionary Theory and the intellectually ineptitude of it's proponents don't matter. And you know what, you'll be right as long as you live. But do this, and you'll be wrong as long as you're dead. Take a guess which one lasts longer and which one is more or less pleasant.

Mikayla Starstuff said...

LOL The other comment guy can believe what he wants. I've heard so many Christians make those same arguments, esp the one about God speaking to them when they pray, that it was not immediate clear to me that this was a parody.

What made it clear to me was that these Christians wouldn't have made the presentation make their beliefs so clearly opposed to reason.

Bruce said...

So let's answer a couple of these points. Of course I won't waste much of my time doing so because I am well aware those who glory in such questions aren't actually interested in the answers.

Apparently you aren't all that interested in the answers either if your sole source of information is answersingenesis.org. Here's a hint: when you have to invoke a mythical flood in order to explain why the fossil record doesn't support evolution, you have already lost.

Hallq said...

Question: what constitutes a "hole in a theory" on your view? How do you go about identifying holes? This is a rather important question, given that you seem not to consider the problem of distant galaxies a hole in creationism. It is all the more strange given that you claim you became a creationist after you learned how to think.

Anonymous said...

Flood or fossils laid down over millions of years of evolution.

What would you expect to see if it were a global flood - Millions of dead things buried in rock laid down by water all over the world.

What do we see? Millions of dead things buried in rock laid down by water all over the world.

What would you expect to see if evolution and slow fossilization were true - Uncountable dead things of uncountable variations buried in rock only in places where disasters had occurred.

Again what do we see? Millions of dead things buried in rock laid down by water all over the world.

Ask yourself how long it takes to make a fossil and then leave a dead jelly fish in your back yard and see how it goes for you... Hey why not... leave a cow it ought to stick around for a few months...

About flaky or as I call it "silly Christians" - You're right. There are so many people who call themselves Christians who have no idea what they are talking about that it gives the rest of us a bad name.

For example 99% of lawyers give the other ones a bad name.

:)

Using a "sole" source of information. If you bother yourself to look at Answers In Genesis you'll see it's a world wide group of scientists most of whom were secular until they started to actually look at the evidence instead of the desired end result.

What constitutes a hole in a theory.

Something that makes it simply not work.

For example. An often misused argument of "irreducible complexity". YES this gets abused by people who don't have a clue what they are talking about.... Sorry but so does MATH.. it doesn't make math incorrect.

Information is what makes things. Information does not occur randomly. Information is used to cause order in things which are disordered. It does not result from disorder.

There simply was no information about how to make a person in a single cell. Where did this information come from then? Oh that's right random mutations...

Interestingly enough, even Creationists suspect that there must be SOME mutations which add information. But you know what even the High Priest Dawkins admits there has never been a documented case of such. It doesn't matter how many times something is bread EVERY SINGLE mutation EVER observed has resulted in a LOSS of information.

That's what I call a hole in a theory.

If the other commenter bothered to read my comment he'd see that I do consider the issue of distant galaxies in a "young" universe.. I think it's a GREAT question. And you know what if so called "Atheists" would stick to REAL questions like this then there could be an orderly discussion. I say "so called" because it's impossible to be an Atheist. To say you're an Atheist is to indicate you have absolute knowledge. IE there's no gold in China means you know every trace element in China isn't gold. It is a flawed statement which is an axiom of falsehood. It's self evident that it's a false statement.

I did link to the astronomy page at AiG which is here;

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/astronomy.asp

Of course there are many theories. Some of which you would find insulting. But some are very plain-jane scientific. For example the speed of light has changed. This has been proven. And scientists can change the speed of light in labs even today. However just as someone who believes that Gravity works because it's observable but can not yet explain it, I see in the text that these things were created to be used as signs. I suspect they were useful from the moment of their creation.

Here's another thought though. Who said we could see them immediately? It doesn't say anywhere in Genesis that the stars were immediately visible.

This is a great question because what we know about physics tells us the speed of light has changed and the lack of an exact reception time (when we first saw the stars) means it's kind of a grey area.

In the end all the intellectualizing and finger pointing won't change the fact that we're all going to die. That we are all going to stand before a just and Holy God who will repay us for the faith or lack of faith we've put in Him.

It's not unreasonable. He only demands we acknowledge the truth of our failings and come to Him for the solution. Anything less would be to pretend we and He are something we and He are not.

John W. Loftus said...

Kevi, did you saying something about a flood?

Bruce said...

There simply was no information about how to make a person in a single cell.

Well, fortunately for us humans, the evolutionary tree doesn't jump directly from a single cell to a human being, there is a little over a billion years of evolution in between. There are a variety of books out on the market today that explain the process if you are interested.

And if you do a little searching on the web about how the changing speed of light supports a young earth/universe it is readily apparent that it doesn't and that the only people who preach this nonsense are creationists who have already settled on the answer and are merely trying to "fix the facts" to the policy.

If the other commenter bothered to read my comment he'd see that I do consider the issue of distant galaxies in a "young" universe.. I think it's a GREAT question. And you know what if so called "Atheists" would stick to REAL questions like this then there could be an orderly discussion.

We do stick to these real questions, you just don't like the real answers. Answer: The age of the earth is just over 4 billion years. I don't even see what the question is?

Here's another thought though. Who said we could see them immediately? It doesn't say anywhere in Genesis that the stars were immediately visible.

Yeah, that is one for the ages. Because some book written by superstitious people thousands of years ago didn't mention that stars could be seen immediately, then it just might not be true. I don't know why the Bible wasn't a required text in my astronomy class at college?

In the end all the intellectualizing and finger pointing won't change the fact that we're all going to die.

I knew there was some spark of reality embedded within your ramblings. Maybe there is hope for you after all?

Anonymous said...

[i]Well, fortunately for us humans, the evolutionary tree doesn't jump directly from a single cell to a human being, there is a little over a billion years of evolution in between. There are a variety of books out on the market today that explain the process if you are interested.[/i]

OK pick one of these books, turn to whatever page shows how information is ADDED by whatever process you choose to support and please post it. Saying there is lots of evidence or there are many books with it does not support your argument.

[i]We do stick to these real questions, you just don't like the real answers. Answer: The age of the earth is just over 4 billion years. I don't even see what the question is?[/i]

And you get this information from where and how exactly? What in fallible source to cite for your information that the Earth is "just over 4 billion years" old so confidently that you don't even see the question?

[i]And if you do a little searching on the web about how the changing speed of light supports a young earth/universe it is readily apparent that it doesn't and that the only people who preach this nonsense are creationists who have already settled on the answer and are merely trying to "fix the facts" to the policy. [/i]

That's an interesting attack. Coming from the side of the "science house" that gave a Nobel award to a "scientist" who was doing work on the theory of the "big bang" which has been disproved by more scientists than Kellogg's has Corn Flakes.

Never mind the question of dating rocks and other things and how their ages change by billions of years on a weekly basis.. .but oh that's right. The Earth IS 4 billion years old... hehehe

And I suppose that secular scientists don't have a foregone conclusions before they do work?

How is that rocks and fossils are dated? Oh now I remember.. they do all (or as many as available) the isotope tests and then pick the one that matches the date presupposed for the rock layer it was found in. Thereby "confirming" the dates they supposed in the first place.....

The truth is, and the saddest thing is, you strongly suspect it to be true, that all the disciplines of Science confirm the Biblical account. It's only by stretching theories to their breaking points, circular logic, guess work and fair tale history that anyone can deny the Bible as factual.

How is it that a layman Christian Apologist can argue circles around the High Priest of Atheism Richard Dawkins? If Evolution IS science it ought to be pretty evident.. if it truly is the "unifying theory of biology" it ought to be pretty near an axiom. But it's not.. it falls apart grossly with anything more than a cursory look at it. But don't worry I'm sure by next week someone will have a new theory that explains it all...

:)

Bruce said...

It's only by stretching theories to their breaking points, circular logic, guess work and fair tale history that anyone can deny the Bible as factual.

I hate to laugh, but the fact that you can even say such a thing with a straight face without seeing the irony is damn funny.

If Evolution IS science it ought to be pretty evident.. if it truly is the "unifying theory of biology" it ought to be pretty near an axiom. But it's not.. it falls apart grossly with anything more than a cursory look at it. But don't worry I'm sure by next week someone will have a new theory that explains it all...

Again, what is evident is that you just don't want to admit it because it goes against your young earth beliefs. And evolution has been around a lot longer than a few weeks. I believe Darwin published Origin of Species 1859. That's closing in on 150 years!

And I suppose that secular scientists don't have a foregone conclusions before they do work?

It's funny that you accuse scientists (real ones, not creationists) of having an agenda but yet half your argument seems to be that scientists can't make up their minds and continue to develop new theories or update existing ones, thus calling into question current theories such as evolution. Actually, that's what makes the scientific method superior, it is open to correction as new information is discovered. It is not a weakness but rather a strength. Religion could definitely learn something from this.

Bad scientists have agendas, that's why creationists are ridiculed (rightly). They seem to be saying that if science can't explain something, then it must be supernatural. But we know from history that a lot of things we were once sure had supernatural origins are today easily explained by science.

Besides, I was under the impression that we can't measure God with our puny little scientific method. I thought God was outside of the realm of our natural world. Doesn't that explain away all those studies that show that prayer doesn't work? So how can creationists use the man-made scientific method to prove any sort of supernatural intervention? If we can scientifically study God, then the Nobel prize for proving God's existence must be right around the corner.

Anonymous said...

Yup Darwin published his work a long time ago...

Do you actually have the book? OK go to the library and open it up. Look at the introduction. Read what Darwin himself said about his theory. Now go look at all the "evidence" you seem to think is so readily available and see if it agrees with what He himself wrote.

Why didn't you open on of those other books you were talking about that prove evolution? I'm still waiting for the proved mechanism for the addition of information resulting in new and "higher" forms of life. Didn't want to bother with that? Or did you go look and quietly realize I'm right?

Every singly person on the planet has preconceived ideas before they study something. These ideas ALWAYS factor into our findings. It's unavoidable. Anyone who claims differently is lying to you. Here's the thing though. Creationists never have to change their point of view. Science always confirms what the Word of God says. In fact the Bible is ahead of science consistently. It's always telling us things we didn't know and when we go looking it turns out to be true.

Here's just a few. http://onmywalk.blogspot.com/search?q=+Scientific+Facts+%26+Concepts+In+The+Bible

What studies that show prayer doesn't work? Are you talking about when people who don't believe ask God to heal plants? Read the book of James and see why I'm not shocked.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=66&chapter=1&version=9

Again, you can twist things all you want.. you can pretend and play games. You can ignore Truth for as long as you live on this Earth. You can pretty much do whatever you want. But it's going to all come out in front of a Judge who knows every single thing you've ever thought.

You can't change the things you've done in your life. You can't even change the way you're going to live in the future. Once you realize this helplessness you'll have some hope. As long as you revel in the idea you have of your own intelligence you're never going to see the truth. Your pride won't let you.

Kev