Misinformation, Distortion, and Pseudoscience in Talking with a Christian Creationist

Here are my other blog posts on Creationism:

My review of “Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism” by Aron Ra 

Creationism is a Debunked Religious Conspiracy Theory 

Creationism (pseudoscience)

The Christian Creationist posted this on Linkedin: Link if Interested 

“Once again the biblical account is true… Snakes had legs (Gen 3:14), and at least one talked. Congress is full of snakes giving the same kind of policy statement and explanation as the 1st snake. Remember you can always trust them… Ha! Ha! https://www.breakingchristiannews.com/articles/display_art.html?ID=29347” – Christian Creationist 

My response, An ancestor of snakes had hind legs around 100 million years ago seen in fossil discovery in Argentina in South America. So are you saying the Bible was wrong on the 6,000 years ago garden of Eden story? Are you saying that the garden of Eden story occurred 100 million years ago as that is before even the earliest arcane humans at 350,000 to 300,000 years ago in northern Africa? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/science/snakes-legs-fossil.html 

“Damien AtHope: I’m saying we don’t know how old the earth truly is. All the dating methods have flaws, Potassium-Argon,  and especially carbon 14, etc.  Christ said in Acts 1:7 “It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.” The takeaway is obvious even for someone as jaded as you. What we do know is the time man has been on earth is 6000 years in biblical history beyond that it’s all speculation. If you could know the times then you could compute the age of the earth and universe. Only morons and atheists believe the universe is 3.5 billion years or older. Too many of the known physical laws prevent it including the conservation of angular momentum and the second law of thermodynamics to name a few. It’s important for ‘science’ (and I use the term loosely) to establish the geological column which is just evidence of the flood so that they can have a free rein to do as they please independent of the Creator. If science really knew what they were teaching they wouldn’t need a series of court decisions to protect evolution.” – Christian Creationist

My response, We do have scientific dating of the Earth it is around 4.5 billion years old. Here is a link: https://www.space.com/24854-how-old-is-earth.html

My response, You are also wrong that only atheists believe in the science that states the age of the universe which is around 13.772 billion years old. Here is a link: https://www.space.com/24054-how-old-is-the-universe.html

My response, The courts found creationism to be unscientific and not worthy to be in school. As seen in the ruling, Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83: “an overwhelming number of scientists, as reflected by every scientific association that has spoken on the matter, have rejected the ID proponents’ challenge to evolution.” The facts support science the courts just did what is reasonable, they followed the evidence. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/

 My response, There is not a single view on human evolution among Christianity. https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/christians/christian/views-about-human-evolution/

“Damien AtHope: It doesn’t matter who else believes. It’s still bullshit. The age of the earth has been corrected numerous times and each time your characters swear by the number presented. Then later on someone will discover a flaw and another number will be calculated. not to mention all the crazy theories of evolution presented as fact.  You people see nothing wrong in suppressing the free flow of information to make your points. I prefer to believe Christ, “It is not for you to know the times.” – Christian Creationist 

My response, It does matter as your claim was in error. It only makes a difference if truth matters to you. I showed you the truth it is not just atheists that believe the science. “No scientific evidence supports creationism viewpoints. On the contrary, as discussed earlier, several independent lines of evidence indicate that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old and that the universe is about 14 billion years old. Rejecting the evidence for these age estimates would mean rejecting not just biological evolution but also fundamental discoveries of modern physics, chemistry, astrophysics, and geology.” As stated by the National Academy of Sciences https://www.nas.edu/evolution/CreationistPerspective.html

“Damien AtHope: Do you always make your points with hearsay evidence? Does opinion make the event true? Why don’t we typically poll to establish truth? There are evolutionists who believe in Intelligent Design BECAUSE the facts supporting the ‘theory’ (like the fossil evidence) are NON EXISTENT or it would be front-page news in every newspaper in the country. The fact that a large majority of Christians believe evolution, particularly Gen X and millennials, only demonstrates the effectiveness of public education’s indoctrination propaganda as I’ve said before.  And you have the temerity to cite that when I’ve noted that EVOLUTION IS THE ONLY VIEW that can be taught in the public schools. What the hell else would you expect from 30+ hours of indoctrination a week? If God needed help in his own creation he Wouldn’t BE much of a god. “Behold I am the LORD the God of all flesh…is there anything too hard for me.” –  Jer 32:27. The Christians who believe this mind control crap haven’t spent much (if any) time reading their own bible as to what the mind of God really says. Oh brother.. you are a trip! You wouldn’t know the truth if it fell on you. The natural explanations of evolutionists do not involve the scientific method. Let’s get that out in the open now. They involve the evolutionist writing a narrative assuming what he alleges is true. Then it undergoes ‘Peer’ review which involves nothing more than another evolutionist concurring with the narrative and VOILA you have a peer-reviewed paper. Bullshit! Perhaps you’ve heard of the Anthropic or Goldilocks principle where there are some 200 variables supporting all of the FORTUITOUS conditions that have to be in place for life to exist on earth, NATURAL SELECTION can’t get you there. A critical factor to demonstrating the possibility of abiogenesis is the formation of proteins from simple carboxylic acids which the Miller-Urey experiment failed to indicate as it produced a racemic mixture and not exclusively the (L-form) racemate so critical to life. Biochemist Michael Behe demonstrates the complexity of the tiny living machines inside the human cell in his book Darwin’s Black Box publication And that’s NOT hearsay.” – Christian Creationist 

My response, You stated a claim that only moron Atheist believe it and I proved you wrong. Also, you made inaccurate claims about science and the world/universe that I also showed you were in error about. You have faith beliefs not supported by the evidence. Believe as you want but it is not supported by the evidence. You called it moronic to believe that which is supported by the evidence and I say you needed to rethink your slander of labeling others that have belief supported by the evidence. You call it bs but you don’t have evidence to support this claim either. I would say that it seems to be you thinking like a moron but unlike you, I strive to be respectful when I talk with others. And as for the book, Darwin’s Black Box is Pseudoscience so it is scientific and that is not hearsay. “The book has received highly critical reviews by many scientists, arguing that the assertions made by Behe fail with logical scrutiny and amount to pseudoscience. For example, in a review for Nature, Jerry Coyne panned the book for what he saw as the usage of quote mining and spurious ad hominem attacks. The New York Times also, in a critique written by Richard Dawkins, condemned the book for having promoted discredited arguments.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin’s_Black_Box

My response, You claim it is me that would not know the truth but it is you that is choosing to believe Pseudoscience or science. “The concept of Irreducible Complexity (IC) has played a pivotal role in the resurgence of the creationist movement over the past two decades. Evolutionary biologists and philosophers have unambiguously rejected the purported demonstration of “intelligent design” in nature, but there have been several, apparently contradictory, lines of criticism. We argue that this is in fact due to Michael Behe’s own incoherent definition and use of IC. This paper offers an analysis of several equivocations inherent in the concept of Irreducible Complexity and discusses the way in which advocates of the Intelligent Design Creationism (IDC) have conveniently turned IC into a moving target. An analysis of these rhetorical strategies helps us to understand why IC has gained such prominence in the IDC movement, and why, despite its complete lack of scientific merits, it has even convinced some knowledgeable persons of the impending demise of evolutionary theory.” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/49764027_Irreducible_Incoherence_and_Intelligent_Design_A_Look_into_the_Conceptual_Toolbox_of_a_Pseudoscience

“Damien AtHope: What kind of evidence is this? As long as Behe cites the source that isn’t plagiarism. The claim of ‘Ad hominem’ attacks are usually liberals whining about somebody hurting their feelings when offering a rebuttal.  Jerry Coyne’s review has nothing to offer of substance other than the claim of spurious attacks and ad Hominem attack and now the New York Times is a scientific publication.. oh please. Let’s see the Dawkins equations that refute Behe’s observations, shall we? Opinion is NOT evidence, only facts are.” – Christian Creationist  

My response, You don’t favor science you favor pseudoscience, and you avoid this fact that the level of support for evolution is “nearly all (around 97%) of the scientific community accepts evolution as the dominant scientific theory of biological diversity. Scientific associations have strongly rebutted and refuted the challenges to evolution proposed by intelligent design proponents.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution#cite_note-dover_pg83-3

“Here are some examples of real errors in a scientific publication not like Coyne’s spurious ‘claims’: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1747016118802970 or the peer review scam: https://www.nature.com/news/publishing-the-peer-review-scam-1.16400“ – Christian Creationist  

My response, And still you don’t have valid evidence for the pseudoscientific claims of creationism or intelligent design over established scientific supported evolution and you never will but you like misleading and distortion for the use of intellectually dishonest propaganda to fool bible believers their mythology is somehow true, like the main post saying 100 million-year-old snake had legs as evidence for the proposed 6,000-year-old garden of Eden fairytale.