This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The lie too big for creationists

#11Faust_8(Topic Creator)Posted 11/19/2012 8:51:22 PM
OrangeWizard posted...
From: Faust_8 | #008
but with some things you just KNOW that they must not actually believe what they're spewing.


Like how some people just KNOW there's a God, or....?


No. Sometimes you know just from their background that they can't possibly be that ignorant of the subject. Or when they say something that contradicts what we learned in public school.
---
The supernatural says that if you act a certain way you might avoid suffering. But reality says you came from the stars...
#12GBALoserPosted 11/21/2012 12:11:48 AM
OrangeWizard posted...
And you believe that they are knowingly lying about it?


Crocoduck is the final answer
---
Every once in a while I realize the human race may be worth saving. Of course, then I come back here, but still, those are good moments. -Readyman
#13CdrRoguePosted 11/21/2012 2:38:48 AM
When they have their arguments fully refuted by real scientists, and then continue using them anyway, yes, they know they're lying.
#14kts123Posted 11/21/2012 7:04:58 AM(edited)
But...we and presumably they know what makes evolution falsifiable. If we found a modern-day creature in rock prehistoric rock among dinosaurs or something, that one piece of evidence would throw the entire theory into a downward spiral. There is simply no way that can happen if evolution is true. No ifs ands or buts. A rabbit skeleton among dinosaurs equals evolution is wrong.


No, rabbit skeleton among dinosaurs equals "Something must be affecting our readings." I honestly find it highly doubtful any scientist would take a single, solitary rabbit fossil among dinosaurs seriously. They would immediately try to explain it away. Sedimentary shift, volcanic activity, etc. And for good reason. Evolution has way too much evidence, any good scientist would be right to be suspicious of a fossil in the wrong layer.

But in the odd case it were actually legitimate, it likely wouldn't get a fair trail. We'd need to find a lot of rabbits in the wrong layers. Then of course, it's also possible scientists might conclude that it was an animal that had a similar skeletal structure of a rabbit. After all, all we have to go on is ancient fossils.

It's the same as those faster than light neutrinos. It's pretty clear to everyone that in all likelihood, it's just an explainable fluke of some sort. But in all reality, a single rabbit fossil that really is in the wrong place, probably wouldn't upend evolution -- or even shake it. Even if it were legitimate. And of course, then there are the people who would call it a hoax.
#15ThuggernautzPosted 11/21/2012 8:10:50 AM
kts123 posted...

It's the same as those faster than light neutrinos. It's pretty clear to everyone that in all likelihood, it's just an explainable fluke of some sort. But in all reality, a single rabbit fossil that really is in the wrong place, probably wouldn't upend evolution -- or even shake it. Even if it were legitimate. And of course, then there are the people who would call it a hoax.


The FTL neutrinos is a bad example. The original report did not conclude they had found FTL particles, in fact, it very specifically said that far more study needed to be done to draw any conclusions. But the media ran with it anyway.