The initial blog post was the usual claim by a theist that atheists don’t have enough proof for their position and at best they “really” should be agnostics. This is the usual tactic to cling to their god by implicitly claiming “But you can’t prove my god doesn’t exist, so I can still make believe he does.” Alas for the theist who make this claim, they forget that their god has very defined characteristics and those characteristics can be analyzed and be tested by the evidence supporting or contradicting them. The theist in question has insisted that he doesn’t need to define this god, and it’s simply “logic” that argues that agnosticism is the right position. He invokes the argument from ignorance:
1.There is no evidence against p.
2. Therefore, p.
3.There is no evidence for p.
and has accused me of that, but again forgets that there is not this overwhelming ignorance he would hope for; we have plenty of positive evidence against the claims of his religion and his bible. If there is no evidence for a magical flood, then there is no reason to think that there was one. If there is no evidence for a God, or Santa Clause, then there is no reason to think there is one. Could there be a probability of something undefined hiding under a rock on Alpha Centauri and that be the Christian god? No, not if the Christian god is as claimed by the bible and Christians. Logic is a powerful tool but it isn’t perfect. Unfortunately, many Christians find it’s their last hope in finding a gap for their god but don’t understand that.
There is evidence for geology showing that this flood did not occur ever and could not have. One has to invoke magic to somehow evaporate all of the evidence that this god did anything ever. That’s worth a chuckle but that’s all. One may as well invoke “Last Thursdayism” where we only *think* we remember our lives and some god made us up last Thursday.
(This Christian is also sure that Santa Claus doesn’t exist. He claims he needs no “evidence” but has “good reasons” to be sure about this. Of course, I have yet to see the “good reasons”. It’s just more special pleading.)
Another Christian has claimed that SCIENCE supports his religion and makes some very typical and very willfully ignorant claims. He claims that genetics “proves” that there was a population bottleneck and his flood is the source. First, it is always a treat to see a theist who wants to invoke science and the scientific method when they think that it supports their religious claims. They demonstrate their hypocrisy when they decide that some science is just peachy but when a bit of that science shows their religion’s claims to be wrong, they will do their best to ignore it. Quite a bit of trying to have their cake and eat it too goes on in creationist nonsense. They depend on willful ignorance, outright lies, attacking strawmen created from superseded ideas, etc. It’s really quite a shame. AT this point, I cannot accept Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. In this age of information, it takes real effort to be this ignorant.
The scientific truth of the matter is that no, genetics doesn’t even remotely support that humanity came from two people or eight. You can look at this article and see how wrong our Christians are.
He then claims that SCIENCE, geology this time, also supports the existence of the global flood claimed to have occurred in the bible. Unfortunately for him, it does no such thing. I have a degree in geology, and I always have to laugh at the pure willful ignorance among theists when it comes to this topic.
First, he claims that since so many myths mention floods, there *has* to have been a global flood. There are indeed a lot of flood myths. However, not all civilizations have them and those that do have them do not match in what they claim. They are often quite different. One can find many of these myths here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html One of my favorites that from the Pygmy: “Chameleon heard a strange noise, like water running, in a tree, but at that time there was no water in the world. He cut open the trunk, and water came out in a great flood that spread all over the earth. The first human couple emerged with the water.” This makes the Judeo-Chrsitian myth wrong on several counts, including saying the creation myth is wrong. Most Christians depend on not knowing what these myths that they run to as “proof” actually say. They would have you believe that as long as a myth says “flood”, then it’s theirs, just don’t look at the man behind the curtain.
Most if not all civilizations arose around rivers. Rivers often flood and that makes a great part of a just-so story to tell a myth about evil and good. Here I usually ask the theist “When did the Flood happen? Because if it can be narrowed down to a certain time period, we certainly should be able to find it. Some make direct claims and fail since there are no flood deposits all over the earth at that time. Others avoid the question entirely, knowing that if there is a date, and we find nothing, one of their claims about having evidence for their god fails.
We see this Christian making the following claims:
“Even more compelling is the fact that the geologic evidence is overwhelmingly consistent, not with a placid uniformitarian sea, but with a violent catastrophic flood. It just happens to not be a respectable position to believe this.”
That entire paragraph is one big lie, dependent again on willful ignorance. And indeed it is not a respectable position since it is a lie. It depends on the claim that geologists only believe in uniformitarianism (the Christian really is talking about uniformity of rate aka gradualism.) No, they don’t. They haven’t since the 19th century. We know that there are catastrophic events that intersperse with the slower processes. We know that there was not some magical uniform lake all over the earth. The misuse of gradualism also influences their ignorance about evolutionary theory and their willful ignorance that Darwin wasn’t the last word on the subject.
There is not one bit of evidence supporting a massive global flood. Yes, they will claim there is and they all fail. If there was this magical flood with the violent spurting of “fountains” and “springs” like Walt Brown’s claim, we would have one huge layer of sediment, sorted within the layer from coarse on the bottom to fine on the top. Within this layer, there would be fossils of humans and animals (including dinos) sorted by hydrologic interaction with similar things together. This would require humans and small dinos like deinonychus being found together. They are not. If there was this flood, we would not see the various layers that sort within each layer from coarse to fine, nor would we see the fossils so nicely arranged by complexity. Potholer54 does an excellent demonstration video on how this works: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sD_7rxYoZY It’s always a good thing when reality so easily trumps the mythology of a religion.
Incidentally, there are a lot of competing theories even between creationists on how the flood happened Just like their religion, the poor things can’t agree at all and of course none of them can show that the others are wrong since none of them have evidence in the first place. That link above is just one small part of a much larger article has a great list of why the whole flood story, from building the ark to its supposed landing, is just ridiculous.
If you have questions, please ask!