Well, let me ask you a question.
If there really is no evidence for creationism, why would creationists insist there is? They can find evidences of the biblical flood and other such Bible claims, but why do they? Could it be because there is evidence? If there was ABSOLUTELY NONE, why do they make good cases about the age of fossils and such things?
23 comments
Respectively, because they're ignorant, in denial, or lying; because they make shit up; no; and they don't.
They look for evidence in the first place because, deep down, they think their religion is wrong; they can't have blind faith and must look for proof. This is normal human behavior, a pervasive curiosity and skepticism that allow us to look critically. Half-Life, your thoughts are being directed by a minority of people who are capable of being willfully ignorant. All they ever manage to find are coincidences.
If there really is no evidence for creationism, why would creationists insist there is? They can find evidences of the biblical flood and other such Bible claims, but why do they?
They don't find any legitimate evidence.
Could it be because there is evidence?
Nope.
? If there was ABSOLUTELY NONE, why do they make good cases about the age of fossils and such things?"
They don't. Learn some real science and stop listening to people that don't know squat!
"If there really is no evidence for creationism, why would creationists insist there is?"
They are deluded, dishonest or both.
"They can find evidences of the biblical flood and other such Bible claims, but why do they?"
They are lying or jumping to spurious conclusions.
"Could it be because there is evidence?"
None has surfaced so far
"If there was ABSOLUTELY NONE, why do they make good cases about the age of fossils and such things? "
They don't
"If there really is no evidence for creationism, why would creationists insist there is?"
Because that their entire game. Assertion without evidence. Have you seen any evidence? I haven't, just claims of it.
Science has a lot of actual evidence otherwise.
"They can find evidences of the biblical flood"
No they can't. NO EVIDENCE of the BIBLICAL FLOOD exists, the world was never totally underwater since land based life existed
"Why do they insist there is evidence when there is none?"
Because they cannot deal with the possibility that what they believe isn't true. They begin with the conclusion that the bible must be true, and anything that says otherwise is wrong. AIG's "Statement of Faith" clearly says this:
"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. "
This of course isn't science. It's exactly the opposite of science. Science looks at all the evidence, and then forms a conclusion based on all the evidence. Creationists further lie to themselves by insisting what they're doing is "creation science".
"why do they make good cases about the age of fossils and such things?"
They don't "make good cases" about the age of the fossils. They lie and caim they are actually 6,000 years old (because that what fits with their "the bible must be true" conclusion) when we know through multiple dating methods that they are millions of years old.
So in summary: They lie to support their "the bible must be true" conclusion. They're "Liars for Jesus".
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
