Wacky Creationist Arguments

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 525

I recently heard some weird arguments for creationism from one of my classmates. Seriously, this is some crazy stuff. I thought I had heard it all, but apparently I haven't. These are their arguments:

1.) Ice ages never happened. Never mind all the old glacial valleys covering North America, the ice cores, or any of that. The 2nd law of thermodynamics says the ice age can't have happened (warmth cannot instantly leave an object) because they found mamoths that froze while they were grazing. For this to happen, the ice age would have had to happen so fast that it instantly froze these creatures. It is more likely that the Great Flood came in and, uh, somehow froze the mamoths Confused

.

2.) Sediment layers do not prove the earth's age. Volcanoes can apparently dump old rock on new rock so sceintists can't really say that the sediment layers are reliable. It is more likely that the Great Flood deposited all the sediments. This also explains the sea shells on mount Everest that no one's found yet. Confused

3.) (you've all heard this one before) Gaps in the fossil record.

This was either caused by too many drugs or not enough.

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 12:31 pm

Cygnus wrote:

1.) Ice ages never happened. Never mind all the old glacial valleys covering North America, the ice cores, or any of that. The 2nd law of thermodynamics says the ice age can't have happened (warmth cannot instantly leave an object) because they found mamoths that froze while they were grazing. For this to happen, the ice age would have had to happen so fast that it instantly froze these creatures. It is more likely that the Great Flood came in and, uh, somehow froze the mamoths Confused

.

Here's Kent Hovind's version of this, with commentary as to just how wrong it is. Smile

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEZTdOlGss

Cygnus wrote:

2.) Sediment layers do not prove the earth's age. Volcanoes can apparently dump old rock on new rock so sceintists can't really say that the sediment layers are reliable. It is more likely that the Great Flood deposited all the sediments. This also explains the sea shells on mount Everest that no one's found yet. Confused

Because scientists can't tell the difference between igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic rocks. Rolling Eyes

Cygnus wrote:

3.) (you've all heard this one before) Gaps in the fossil record.

They're rivaled, however, by the gaps in the creationist skull.

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 12:17 am

Ignorance is bliss.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 525

The Creationist I talked with seemed to believe that when the Flood happened, some places where the mamoths lived were really cold and the floodwaters would have frozen into snow and iced the mamoths. He still has no expalanation as to why mamoths exist the way they are, why they're extinct, or why they are 35,000 years old.

Newbie First Class Joined: Mar 29, 2008 Posts: 48

The gaps in the fossil record isn't a problem considering that satan put them there in the first place.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 525

That's another thing they always say: the devil did it! Why can't god simply remove the fake fossils satan keeps putting in the ground for us to find?

Newbie First Class Joined: Mar 29, 2008 Posts: 48

God was too bussy destroying 99.99999999% of all life in a massive flood to keep track of what satan was doing.

Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:21 am

Dinosaurs were created at the same time as other animals, but heavier bodies sink lower, so that's why dinos are found in lower strata. What about smaller creatures found lower down? Well, um.......the Flood did it. Laughing

(It's amazing the miracles that flood could perform, huh?)

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 525

So dinosaurs died in the flood because god didn't give a shit about them, huh? Moses was supposed to load two of every species into his imaginary ark. If elefants survived, then there is no damn good reason why dinosaurs wouldn't have been taken also.

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 16, 2008 Posts: 78

A British sci-fi writer called Brian Aldiss wrote a short story back in the 70's (I think) called, "The Expensive, Delicate Ship."

This was a fantasy based around the idea that there were TWO ships that tried to survive the great Flood. One was the Ark, with Noah, his sons Ham, Shem and Japheth and their wives. They had two of every kind of animal on board and they survived, coming to rest on Mount Ararat.

The other ship, which sank, was described as being so huge that it made the ark look like, "a tiny chip or splinter of wood in comparison". The expensive, delicate ship was made by a guy (forewarned by Satan perhaps?) who loaded it with every other kind of living thing.
Dinosaurs, unicorns, dragons, hippogriffs, cyclopses, harpies, elves, gnomes, pixies, pegasi, etc., etc....you name it!

Of course, because god decreed that only the ark would remain afloat, it's vast, ornately decorated rival sank and these unfit creatures all perished.
Nice fantasy!

These days the YEC's (Young Earth Creationist's) say that the marine dinosaurs survived the Flood anyway, because they wouldn't have been affected by it. This explains why icthyosaurs, pleisiosaurs, ammonites, archelons and brontoscorpii (giant sea scorpions) are regularly caught in fishing nets the world over.

They never get examined by scientists on dry land because there's no market for their meat and the factory ships that fillet and freeze modern-day fish like tuna, cod and anchovies simply aren't geared up to deal with such huge animals. They all get thrown back overboard. The fishermen know that nobody will believe them if they reveal the truth about their dino-sized catches - explaining why this mystery remains unsolved.

Oops! I forgot about the coelacanth! Embarassed

BornAgainAthiest.

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 12:45 am

Quote:

They never get examined by scientists on dry land because there's no market for their meat and the factory ships that fillet and freeze modern-day fish like tuna, cod and anchovies simply aren't geared up to deal with such huge animals. They all get thrown back overboard. The fishermen know that nobody will believe them if they reveal the truth about their dino-sized catches - explaining why this mystery remains unsolved.

And of course, they are never able to provide any proof of these assertions. If fishermen are throwing back their catches of plesiosaurs and whatnot, and not telling anybody, then how does anybody know about them? Laughing

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 525

BornAgainAthiest wrote:

A British sci-fi writer called Brian Aldiss wrote a short story back in the 70's (I think) called, "The Expensive, Delicate Ship."

This was a fantasy based around the idea that there were TWO ships that tried to survive the great Flood. One was the Ark, with Noah, his sons Ham, Shem and Japheth and their wives. They had two of every kind of animal on board and they survived, coming to rest on Mount Ararat.

The other ship, which sank, was described as being so huge that it made the ark look like, "a tiny chip or splinter of wood in comparison". The expensive, delicate ship was made by a guy (forewarned by Satan perhaps?) who loaded it with every other kind of living thing.
Dinosaurs, unicorns, dragons, hippogriffs, cyclopses, harpies, elves, gnomes, pixies, pegasi, etc., etc....you name it!

Of course, because god decreed that only the ark would remain afloat, it's vast, ornately decorated rival sank and these unfit creatures all perished.
Nice fantasy!

These days the YEC's (Young Earth Creationist's) say that the marine dinosaurs survived the Flood anyway, because they wouldn't have been affected by it. This explains why icthyosaurs, pleisiosaurs, ammonites, archelons and brontoscorpii (giant sea scorpions) are regularly caught in fishing nets the world over.

They never get examined by scientists on dry land because there's no market for their meat and the factory ships that fillet and freeze modern-day fish like tuna, cod and anchovies simply aren't geared up to deal with such huge animals. They all get thrown back overboard. The fishermen know that nobody will believe them if they reveal the truth about their dino-sized catches - explaining why this mystery remains unsolved.

Oops! I forgot about the coelacanth! Embarassed

BornAgainAthiest.

So that's why I never see pleisiosaurs on Deadliest Catch! Laughing

The Learned Joined: Nov 30, 2004 Posts: 122

Cygnus wrote:

I recently heard some weird arguments for creationism from one of my classmates. Seriously, this is some crazy stuff. I thought I had heard it all, but apparently I haven't. These are their arguments:

1.) Ice ages never happened. Never mind all the old glacial valleys covering North America, the ice cores, or any of that. The 2nd law of thermodynamics says the ice age can't have happened (warmth cannot instantly leave an object) because they found mamoths that froze while they were grazing. For this to happen, the ice age would have had to happen so fast that it instantly froze these creatures. It is more likely that the Great Flood came in and, uh, somehow froze the mamoths Confused

.

2.) Sediment layers do not prove the earth's age. Volcanoes can apparently dump old rock on new rock so sceintists can't really say that the sediment layers are reliable. It is more likely that the Great Flood deposited all the sediments. This also explains the sea shells on mount Everest that no one's found yet. Confused

3.) (you've all heard this one before) Gaps in the fossil record.

This was either caused by too many drugs or not enough.

You have more patience than I do. I've given up on creation/evolution arguments and write them off. The only arguments for those I deal with is by questions: "Have you ever seen a super-nova and know the significance of it? I have and do." "Have you ever dug up fossils and helped piece them together? I have." "Have you ever studied sedimentary layers and understand how geology actually works? I have and do."
Until they do those things for themselves and produce the journals etc... of them then they are not worthy of the discussion. Science is too detailed to rest a belief system on because it must be allowed to change as we learn.
The fact that science changes is not a weakness as christians like to treat it but a strength.

The arguments I prefer are simple questions:

Scripture says even the hairs of his children's head are important to god yet thousands were snuffed out in the blink of an eye on 9/11 and hundreds of thousands in the 2004 Tsunami/earthquake. It's written none can be snatched out of his hand yet other verses indicate they can "fall away" and they therefore have lost salvation. And the hundreds of Old Testament otracities and contradictions with NT that they somehow sweep under the rug. Extremely few have ever read about the law to stone to death the son who talks back to his parents, detailed instructions on what spoils of war to take including their virgins, or the fact that no evidence exists the events ever took place anyway. They are just stories to build up their people no different than the Koran was for.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore