Creationist lulz

From here

There is a preponderance of scientific evidence to support creation as the correct explanation for our existence. The misconception that evolution is science while creation is religion is propagated by a variety of “myths” surrounding the evidence for evolution.

Awesome, let’s see it! Will we get any evidence?


Our universe is the result of explosive expansion of the “Cosmic Egg” billions of years ago.


This just ignores the bigger question-who laid the “cosmic egg”? The first law of thermodynamics proves that matter and energy cannot just appear. Evolutionists must ignore the most basic law of science at the very start of their belief system. Furthermore, explosions do not result in increased organization of matter. Has an explosion ever created ordered complexity?

Uhm…it’s not a “cosmic egg,” It was a singularity, the problem with the law of thermodynamics is that you are assuming matter and energy operated under Newtonian law in these conditions, unfortunately, relativity and Newtonian laws do not apply. We KNOW certain conditions lead to a breakdown of relativity and Newtonian laws, similarly, we know when can apply these models. You are equating an explosion to cosmological expansion; “big bang” is a metaphor, don’t take it literally.


The fossil record proves evolution.


There are no transitions between vastly different types of animals in either the living world or the fossil record. Lining up three objects by size or shape does not prove that one turned into the other.

Tiktaalik, (fish->amphibian) Pikaia (invertebrate->vertebrate), Procynosuchus (reptile->mammal), Confuciusornis (therapod->bird)… Nope, no transitional fossils

Extant: Cryptocercus, Mastotermes, Ensatina salamander group, Larus gull group, Phylloscopus trochiloides, Gasterosteus aculeatus

Nope! No observed ones either…


Structural and biochemical similarities prove common ancestry.


The lack of fossil transition strongly refute this myth. Common ancestry is only one of two possible explanations for similarities. Purposeful design can explain the same features in a more direct way. In addition, totally different organisms often display similar features. This supports the existence of a common designer.

Purposeful design? Please explain to me the reason we have four fingers (and a thumb) on each hand? I could do just fine (in terms of survival and dexterity) with two or three and a thumb.  Purposeful design would entail something DESIGNED such things as oncogenes, endogenous retroviruses, the appendix, the legs of whales, ostrich and emu wings, cavefish and cave salamander eyes, etc. Please, tell me that argument is a joke, someone put an amazing amount of work into making evidence for evolution, I guess. Your deity of choice is trying to deceive everyone by putting so much evidence out there for evolution… Doesn’t that make you feel good?


The rock layers of the earth form the pages of earth’s history showing million of years of evolutionary progression.


The fossil record does not show a clear “simple-to-complex” progression of life forms. Life is complex and well developed wherever it is found in the fossil record. Major groups of plants and animals appear suddenly in the fossil record, with nothing leading up to them. Most rock layers and the fossils they contain can be explained better by a worldwide flood and subsequent events.

I love this one; it assumes the only fossils we’re looking at are vertebrates. What about those organisms that are AQUATIC and live in SALT WATER? What’s really cool is that those aquatic organisms that live in fresh water wouldn’t die from the salinity associated with all of the oceans mixing with their habitats. If you’re evil, here’s an experiment, get hold of some goldfish (Carassius auratus) and put them in water with 20 ppt (parts per thousand), see what happens. The ocean has a minimum salinity of 30 ppt. Also, where did the water GO? I mean, enough water to cover the entire planet, that’s a lot of water, where did it go? How big would a ship have to be to fit two of EVERY animal on board? I mean, how do you fit two of every species of terrestrial vertebrate [FOUR elephants (two species), two giraffes, two horses, two lions, two jaguars, two tigers, two pumas, two buffalo, two bison, two kangaroos, two Tasmanian tigers, two platypus, two antellope, two black mambas, two anacondas, two oxen, two yaks, two sheep, two bison, two of every species of amphibian, two of everyother terrestrial snake…]  on a single boat? And food for them, too? For 40 days?


Radiometric dating methods are “absolute.” They are accurate and reliable.


Although radiometric dating methods seem to show a trend of great age, these methods depend upon numerous other assumptions. When used to date events of known age, such as lava flow in Hawaii or the Grand Canyon, they have been wrong by orders of magnitude. How can we be sure they are accurate for events of unknown age? Furthermore, the vast majority of dating method indicate a very young earth.

They were wrong because the method used was incorrectly applied and used a machine which was not sensitive enough to detect levels of argon which would correspond to an age of less than ~2,000,000 years. If you understood the science of this method, you would not be making that argument, it was an intentional misrepresentation of the method. Read more here.


The human body contains many “vestigial organs” , leftovers from our evolutionary development.


Although at one time there were dozens of features of the human body listed as vestigial, most have been shown to have important functions. After all, even if a few parts have lost their original function that does not prove evolution. To demonstrate evolution, you need to show the development of completely new structures, not the loss and degeneration of previous characteristics.

Oh, cool, so, in that case, NOTHING is new, this is how evolution actually works, it is an adaptation of things which already exist. So, since jaws are adaptations of gill arches, it’s not a new feature. Cool how that logic works!


The fossil record for human evolution is complete and clear.


All too often the propagandists for evolution present their story with statements such as, “Every knowing person believes that man descended from apes. Today there is no such thing as the theory of evolution, it is the fact of evolution.” (Ernst Mayr) The evidence for human evolution is fragmentary and reconstruction involves artistic license. Many competent scientists totally reject evolution. They acknowledge that it is not even a good scientific theory, much less a fact.

Oh, I love this argument, just because we don’t have every single organism means that it is fragmentary. Even if we had one of every single generation, this argument would be used. Who are your competent scientists? What evidence do they have for this? What evidence have you presented? All you put forth are vacuous claims that evolution is wrong and that means, automatically, that YOU are right. This is a false dichotomy, the other side of which you haven’t even removed. It is a false dichotomy on top of a straw man on top of an argument from ignorance. Learn logic, learn science, learn something…


3 Responses to “Creationist lulz”

  1. April 23, 2009 at 2:56 pm

    Who laid the Cosmic Egg?

    This silly question avoids having to explain that the universe is so huge and seems to be expanding because God made it that way a few thousand years ago.

    Explaining YOUR magical thinking requires painting the opposition as just another set of magical thinking ‘beliefs’ or just saying, “Why not, God can do it anyway HE wants!”

  2. 2 jaredcormier
    April 23, 2009 at 3:42 pm

    Except that, doing it that way would imply said deity is one or more of the following:
    1) deceitful (6 day creation vs. all evidence)
    2) stupid (ERVs, cancer, bursting appendixes)
    3) absent
    4) lazy (can’t solve any problems?)
    5) psychotic (ever notice how many kids die of malnutrition?)

  3. 3 Colloquy
    April 24, 2009 at 5:29 pm

    I vote for absent – it’s the best of the 5 possibilities but it also implies that he doesn’t give a shit.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Join the best atheist themed blogroll!

RSS Adventures in Ethics and Science

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Blag Hag

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS denialism blog

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.


  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Greg Laden’s Blog

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Laelaps

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Lawful Good Wonk

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted)

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Pharyngula

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Tetrapod Zoology

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS White Coat underground

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Older stuff

wordpress stats

%d bloggers like this: