Arguing with Creationists...

[Skism]

I am a member of a Chess club and I made the mistake of finding out that one of the people there is a creationist....Stupid arguments galore.

You would think a chess player (who is a high ish rating) would not make silly arguments

The arguments that I care to remember:

Violates a scientific principle because no none was there to see supposed evolution

Nonone has seen evolution.

Wings could not have evolved.

Claims that geneticists don't believe in evolution

Said that after 200 years it is still only a theory

They fit this picture quite well:



http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0 ... 967744.png

I felt like I had been hit by a stupefying spell...I could offer only weak counter arguments invoking dogs, millions of years, mutations and in the end said forget about it.

[Stars_InTheirEyes]

You could try and fool them with a picture of this little guy:
[ external image ]
and say its photographic proof that we evolved out of the sea.

Well, if they're stupid enough to believe in creationism, I wouldn't put it past them to believe that.

[Widow Maker]

You would think a chess player (who is a high ish rating) would not make silly arguments

People seem to have a gift for segmenting their minds. Some segments aren't for logical thought and analysis. There isn't anyway that something so ridiculous as creationism could survive even mild analysis.

[mrbadger]

simple way to make them uncomfortable (but never to win, there is no winning) is to point out how far away some other stars are, ask them if they agree, then point out that the light from them couldn't have reached us if everything was six thousand years old.

Like I said, you won't win, but it'll be slightly satisfying watching them backtrack if they fall for it.

That said, I lost an argument with a creationist while showing him a fossil when I was a teenager. He just said it was a rock, insisted in fact, so I just walked away. You can't fix stupid.

[clakclak]

The newest argument I heard them bring up was that the laws of nature (physics, maths, biology and so on) were different 8000 years ago.

It is quite funny when even the Vatican under conservative pope Benedikt XVI locks you out because: "intellegent design is not a scientific point of view".

[X2-Illuminatus]

Chess, the contest of minds struggling to best one another on the battlefield...

[Skism]

You would think a chess player (who is a high ish rating) would not make silly arguments

People seem to have a gift for segmenting their minds. Some segments aren't for logical thought and analysis. There isn't anyway that something so ridiculous as creationism could survive even mild analysis.

Yer I know - It just shocked me you know, my opinion of the man just took a nosedive...

[Skism]

simple way to make them uncomfortable (but never to win, there is no winning) is to point out how far away some other stars are, ask them if they agree, then point out that the light from them couldn't have reached us if everything was six thousand years old.

Like I said, you won't win, but it'll be slightly satisfying watching them backtrack if they fall for it.

That said, I lost an argument with a creationist while showing him a fossil when I was a teenager. He just said it was a rock, insisted in fact, so I just walked away. You can't fix stupid.

That might work if he is a young earth creationist - I don't actually know if he is, Ill try it if the subject of the age of the Universe comes up. - Im kinda dreading it though....

[Timsup2nothin]

Why would you bother? Creation myths have been around forever, and show no signs of disappearing. They just get more complex.

In their complexity they tend to disguise the fact that they are self referential. There is a core of axioms that are accepted on faith or rejected, but seldom actually even examined, and the structure built upon them, where the arguments take place, is impossible to prove or disprove, depending on how one looks at the axioms.

Every creation myth experiences a period of popularity where it is regarded as being real. The popularity of the current creation myth (big bang, natural selection by random events, etc) does not make it somehow superior, so there is no point in defending it. If someone chooses the "big man in the sky" myth, or the "matrix" myth, or the "meddlers from the higher plane" myth what does it really matter?

I personally like the myth of Fred. Fred the supreme being created the universe we know and everything in it yesterday. He included all the necessary evidence of prior existence, even the memories in our tiny brains. The reason I like the myth of Fred is that in its simplicity it clearly illustrates the impossibility of disproving ANY creation myth.

[brucewarren]

But was Fred around last Wednesday ? Yes I went there.

[Timsup2nothin]

But was Fred around last Wednesday ? Yes I went there.

Beats me. If he was he was probably crafting the really cool memories of last Wednesday that I was blessed with. When I was created. Yesterday.

[CBJ]

Violates a scientific principle because no none was there to see supposed evolution

What scientific principle? Is he thinking of the philosophical question?

Nonone has seen evolution.

The same could be said about God.

Said that after 200 years it is still only a theory

Strictly speaking this is true. That's how science works.

[fiksal]

hm...

I second the "why bother" notion.


what's there to argue? have "they" proven that "their" creation theory is the true-est among all religions?

[Timsup2nothin]

hm...

I second the "why bother" notion.


what's there to argue? have "they" proven that "their" creation theory is the true-est among all religions?

Has anyone? "Religion" or not?

[fiksal]

hm...

I second the "why bother" notion.


what's there to argue? have "they" proven that "their" creation theory is the true-est among all religions?

Has anyone? "Religion" or not?

Not the last time I checked

[eladan]

I am a member of a Chess club and I made the mistake of finding out that one of the people there is a creationist....Stupid arguments galore.

"Never argue with a stupid person. They'll drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience."?

[muppetts]

I am a member of a Chess club and I made the mistake of finding out that one of the people there is a creationist....Stupid arguments galore.

You would think a chess player (who is a high ish rating) would not make silly arguments

The arguments that I care to remember:

Violates a scientific principle because no none was there to see supposed evolution

Nonone has seen evolution.

Wings could not have evolved.

Claims that geneticists don't believe in evolution

Said that after 200 years it is still only a theory

They fit this picture quite well:



http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0 ... 967744.png

I felt like I had been hit by a stupefying spell...I could offer only weak counter arguments invoking dogs, millions of years, mutations and in the end said forget about it.

Don't bother talking with these people, I tend to think of them as having extensive brain damage, not their fault, the are just broken. Then treat them like you would a rather slow puppy who just does not get 'sit!'.

(I would pay to see you chasing a creationist around the room with a rolled up newspaper shouting SIT!!! I SAID SITTTTTT!!!!)

[mrbadger]

Said that after 200 years it is still only a theory

Strictly speaking this is true. That's how science works.

I could wish I had a theory. The most I've had are hypothesis, and one of those I disproved myself (slightly worrying at the time, since it was the reason for my Ph.D funding )

Their issue is mistaking theory for hypothesis. They don't even have those, since I hypothesis must be falsifiable.

Nonone has seen evolution.

No longer true. It has definatelly been observed in Moths in the last century, and I beleive there was a more recent observation too, not sure what it was, because it's early and I want porridge more than net research.

[bonalste]

Evolution would be like a tornado passing through a junkyard and magically making a fully-working 747 out of the randomly put-together parts. It just doesn't make sense and how any rational, logical person can believe in such nonsense that basically 2 chimps mated and a human came out is beyond me.

Hah only joking. I wonder how much blood began boiling with that one.

[ATTACK_HAMSTER]

Evolution would be like a tornado passing through a junkyard and magically making a fully-working 747 out of the randomly put-together parts. It just doesn't make sense and how any rational, logical person can believe in such nonsense that basically 2 chimps mated and a human came out is beyond me.

Hah only joking. I wonder how much blood began boiling with that one.

PMSL you got me

Oh the humble peppered moth.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution