OJBs Web Site: Instagram Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

(Go Up to OJB's Instagram Page)

Destroying Creationism Debate

Entry 135, on 2023-01-24 at 21:20:00

A debate regarding a book that claims: "There are many evidences that by themselves destroy creationism. DNA is the fastest one to do the job. 60 seconds in fact! No creationist can offer anything credible or even logical against THIS. Throw you bibles away!"

Supporter Thank you for posting this.

Opponent So how does this disprove God?

Supporter It shows that there was no Adam and Eve created by a god. And rather that I explain it to you, please read a book or two about evolution.

Supporter Please look up "non sequitur", because that characterizes your response.

Opponent That is easily the most ignorant retaliation I've ever heard.

Supporter Your god claims he made humans. In their current form, from nothing. Anthropology, biology, geology and genomics provide evidence that humans did not suddenly appear from nowhere - our species evolved over millions of years, along with many others.

Supporter LOL, first time using your apologetics? Aren't you the moron from a couple days ago who was invoking your new found apologetics "gotchas".

Opponent No?

Supporter May be an image of 1 person and text that says "IF THERE WAS EVIDENCE FOR GOD, THE CHURCH WOULD USE IT. @SIXXTOPLA @SIXXTO INSTEAD THEY RELY ON BRAINWASHING KIDS TO PERPETUATE THEIR MYTH".

Opponent I missed where god was proven to need disproof.

Me It doesn't. it just supports evolution, which helps disprove creation.

Me DNA is a mess. There are parts which don't work properly, bits shared with other species, bits which came from viruses, bits which are duplicates then changed. If a God created it, he did it unbelievably badly. We would expect all that.

Opponent Your lack of understanding doesn't mean it's bad. God creates everything in his image. You may not like it but doesn't mean it's badly designed. God is mysterious but his work is amazing.

Me Oh, it's the old "god works in mysterious ways" defence, eh? Can you not see how weak that is? That could be used to prove or disprove literally anything. DNA is well designed. God did it. DNA is poorly designed. God works in mysterious ways.

Opponent Considering God created an expanding universe billions of years ago. The fact God exist outside of time. To say we know everything about God would be a lie. To say he is mysterious is truth.

Opponent And I didn't say it was wrong, you did the science defender. I said you lack understanding. That you a human think the design is bad but not by God.

Me Tell me, what would you need to see in nature to say a god *didn't* do it. I mean, can your "god theory" be falsified?

Opponent No.

Me So no matter what you are told, what you see, or what is discovered, you will never change your mind. Well, I think that explains why you believe such absurd nonsense then.

Opponent Okay how was the universe created?

Me That's a very good question. The consensus is heading more towards the idea that the universe has always existed, and that the Big Bang (which undoubtedly happened in some form) represents a local phenomenon which formed our universe. So our universe is just part of much bigger multiverse, infinite in time and space. This is difficult to prove, but there is hope that evidence might be available in the near future. If that was shown to be true, would it affect your beliefs?

Opponent So no proof, no evidence, just a belief system? Interesting. So your belief just doesn't have a God and mine does.

Me There is evidence, but it is very preliminary at this point, which I freely admit. The best conclusion we have at this point is that we really don't know with any certainty. But not knowing is not an excuse to invoke superstition, and you know about "the god of the gaps", right?

Opponent The evidence of a multi verse?

Me There's a pile of papers on the subject. Here are a few I found in my research over the last few years...

Me Quantum Fluctuations in Cosmology and How They Lead to a Multiverse, Alan H. Guth (Submitted on 27 Dec 2013); Multiversality, Frank Wilczek (Submitted on 28 Jul 2013); Why Comparable? A Multiverse Explanation of the Dark Matter-Baryon Coincidence, Raphael Bousso, Lawrence Hall (Submitted on 23 Apr 2013 (v1).

Opponent Dark Matter?! Hahaha another thing science can't prove exist. Try again.

Me Well we know it exists but we don't know what it is. Does the Bible mention it, at all? :)

Me And did you read the paper before commenting?

Opponent I read your comments had no links or nothing.

Me Ever heard of Google?

Opponent No.

Me OK ... sigh ... let me do it for you. Here's a fairly understandable article that uses the sort of evidence I was talking about.

Opponent This doesn't say anything. It just says it "could" be evidence and their display of evidence is just theories based on radiation. Wow. So theories. Just made up. Sorry this still doesn't disprove God. Far from it.

Me I said that we currently don't know what caused the Big Bang but we're working on it and there are some possible hypotheses worth pursuing. No one said we know everything. Far from it.

Opponent I wasn't talking about the big bang I was talking about their "proof" of multiverses.

Me Yes, the two are related. As I said, the multiverse theories are quite new and under development now. Some seem quite promising, but it is early days.

Opponent So you are preaching the existence of the universe based on a theory that could be promising. As exciting as it is to find new discoveries about our universe I wouldn't put my eggs all in one basket for this theory.

Me We're not; there are other possibilities too. It is a fairly new area of research. All I can say is that there are several possibilities which fit with currently known physics, and none involve a god.