Creationism Top 25 Logical Fallacies 1of3
Uploader Comments (djarm67)
Top Comments
-
I like the God Delusion tribute at the start.
-
Ho...boy.
Macroevolution does happen, and has been observed. Observed speciation is a great example of this. Creationists are very careful to avoid defining what they'd accept as a "kind" because one of these is always true:
1. Man and (other) apes are the same kind.
2. One kind has been know to split into two. Not only that, but there is no boundary between macro and micro evolution. Macro evolution is simply micro-evolution over time.
All Comments (63)
-
I actually believed in evolution for years - and I really want to believe in evolution!! But every stone I uncover leads me to seriously doubt it. Every word you used in the beginning of this you tube video I could easily use about the theory of evolution. Your video was an embarrassment to the theory of evolution and you are completely blind to the fact that the arguments you use are exactly the arguments that one could easily use against evolution.
-
Now, isn't this series a form of the fallacy Poisoning the Well?
-
fellatious ...
-
@rainbowcicak If you really want him to prove to you that evolution is real your gonna have to read the whole book about Natural selection, evolution and adaptation.
-
@rainbowcicak Yes, it is.
-
@SchecterxGuitars Evolution is proven ? Oh really , tell me.
-
1 word, archaeopteryx ;-)
-
@golddigger159 So you shipped him off to us? What are we supposed to do with him? You guys need to take him back, we have enough real American idiots already. Seriously man. Why do we get all the stupid people?
-
You are mistaken sir>
Micro evolution is> variations within a species. That does happen.
Macro evolution is> One species changing into another. That does not happen.
This is a philosophical religious position. That is fine. It is not science and should not be taught in science classrooms. If your world view or belief system (like mine) sees something behind this universe, it does not automatically make it a testable claim via the process of methodological naturalism (the scientific method). When these people make testable claims which are clearly wrong when tested or dishonestly wrong when they lie about the evidence, their true motives come into question.
djarm67 3 years ago