GULO and other Irrational Atheist Arguments – Part 2

7 Popular, but Fallacious Arguments by Atheists

Evolution uses circular arguments to support the supposition that dinosaurs became extinct 65 million years ago.
More arguments used by atheists that upon inspection are clearly wrong and fail to support atheistic or
evolutionary doctrine.
 
In Part 1 of this article I discussed problems 1 and 2: GULO and LUCA respectively and why they are irrational arguments. In closing the discussion  on LUCA I noted that evolutionists and atheists are blind to evidence of intelligent design. This leads into our next irrational
argument:

3. “There’s no evidence”
Atheists and Evolutionists alike tend to use this argument for anything they don’t believe. They don’t believe in God, so they say there’s no evidence of God. They don’t believe in intelligent design, so they say there’s no evidence for it. They don’t believe in miracles, so they say there’s no evidence of them. This argument is particularly common in the twitter world:


 

Notice the above person states no “verifiable” evidence. This means there is no evidence you can present that will meet his standard for “verifiable.” (An illicit shifting of the burden of proof.) The problem with saying “there’s no evidence” is you must then explain away  all the sites with evidence – like this one,  or creation.com or answersingenesis.org or a host of other sites and books (including the Bible) which provide the evidence against evolution and for God and intelligent design which they claim doesn’t  exist.  Brian Auten provides a list of such sites on his  Apologetics315  here.  In light of the  overwhelming evidence, one is tempted to say they’re simply  lying. After all, it’s one thing to say the evidence is misunderstood; quite another to say that none exists. But there are at least two other dynamics likely at play here.
First, in an attempt to strengthen the case for evolution and atheism they could simply be attempting to suppress the evidence, but really – that is just using the language  of logic as another way of saying they’re being deceptive (read – lying) .  A second real and likely option is that they are so brainwashed by evolutionary propaganda that they have become blinded to the truth and actually can’t see the  evidence – even when looking right at it. As scripture says:

The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of
Christ, who is the image of God.

2 Cor 2.4

Part of the light of the gospel is the fact that God exists and God created. The god of this age – Satan – doesn’t want you to believe that; so those following atheistic or evolutionary beliefs have unwittingly fallen for yet  another lie of the father of the lies, which keeps them captive to false philosophies. We must pray for such people in hopes that  “they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.” (2 Tim 2.26)

 

4. “Dinosaur fossils are millions of years old

“Everyone knows what wiped out the dinosaurs. Sixty five million years ago it came from outer space.” So begins a documentary entitled “What really killed the dinosaurs?” It perpetuates the supposed date which scientists have settled on as the date for when the dinosaurs became extinct: 65 million years ago. Scientists also use fossils to verify that date – a date which supports an old earth theory of earth history instead of a young one. But as Kent Hovind is fond of pointing out the fossil evidence argument is a circular one. He relates the story of a visit he took with his daughter to the School of Mines & Technology Museum of Geology, Rapid City S.D. His daughter asks the tour guide”

Sir how do you know those bones are a hundred million years old?

Honey we tell the age of the bones by which layer they came from.

She said, sir, when we were standing over there, You told me you knew the age of the layers by the bones, and now you’re
telling me you know the age of the bones by the layers. She said, isn’t that circular reasoning?
2

Circular Reasoning - Strata are dated by fossils; then fossils dated by strata - Kent Hovind
Graphic: The Creation Series- Kent Hovind

Indeed it is circular reasoning and it allows scientists to set a base reference point for the age of fossils to any value they like. And they like the millions of years time frame because that allows them to accommodate their evolutionary theories. Never mind this practice is unscientific and illogical – it supports the religion of evolution, so no one is ever called to account for it.

 

5 “Junk DNA proves DNA was not designed”
DNA is such a powerful testimony to a super intelligent designer, evolutionists and atheists have had to work long and hard to try to explain it away. Even so, they’ve still failed in their efforts. Francis Crick, the discover of DNA at one point went so far as to promote a theory called directed panspermia – that aliens brought DNA to earth because he knew it was preposterous to try get anyone to believe it came about by random chance occurrences.3 Another attempt at an explanation is the junk DNA gambit which supposes – since they don’t know – that only 2% of the human genome is used. This has been stated by atheist evangelist Richard Dawkins and others. Their gambit has proved to be nothing but an  fallacious appeal to ignorance. As the following video illustrates, scientists now  conservatively estimate that 93% of the human genome is used – conservatively meaning that number may – and probably will – go up. This is based on scientific evidence4, not mere presupposition as those holding to this failed theory of junk DNA.


 

6 Natural Selection is the Answer to Intelligent design questions.

In my article titled The Poor Marksmenship of Evolutionists I  point out how the answers evolutionists give tend not to answer the question at hand. As an example, I point out that DNA is a super complex system for encoding information and challenge them via 4 questions to explain – using only random processes – since that’s all the theory of evolution will allow – how such a sophisticated, clearly designed system came about.  As they have been taught that Natural Selection is the answer to everything with regards to origins, one atheist dutifully replied that Natural selection is the answer to all 4 questions. I explained (rather patiently from my perspective) that Natural selection could not be the answer because DNA must be fully functional and operating in 2 reproducing  members of a species before Natural Selection can even begin to work. I didn’t bother to mention that additionally those species must be under some type of environmental stress for natural selection to operate (for instance a brown bear in the artic would not be as successful as a white bear as Cosmos – Odyssey5 Episode 2 points out) – which typically implies other members of other species also with working DNA. Natural Selection obviously could not have created DNA if DNA is necessary and working before natural selection even begins to work

 

7  “The Bible is a myth”

This takes many forms – “you believe in a magical [implied non-existent] god”, “the bible is full of fairy tales”, “the bible is a myth – as is every other god.” But once it is pointed out that the bible is based on history – and most of its events took place at identifiable locations on the earth, and it’s populated with historical people, doing historical things that are recorded in not just the bible, but other historical books6 – it is quickly apparent this is not just a book full of fanciful stories.

This objection is really a denial that you can know anything historical that you didn’t personally witness. How do you know, for instance, that George Washington existed and was the first president? How do you know World War I happened?  How do we know the holocaust happened?  The answer to all of these is we have historical records which include eye witness testimonies and we have evidence; some of which includes a lasting legacy. For instance the fact that we have a current US president is a legacy to the founding of the US and evidence there was a first president. The diary of Anne Frank and the remnants of the concentration camp at Dachau are evidences of the holocaust. And the many Christian churches throughout the world is a legacy and testimony to the founder of the Christian churches – Jesus Christ7 – who is the focus of the Bible. Additionally, the evidence for the Biblical account of history such as the resurrection of Jesus is as strong if not stronger than the evidence we have for any other historical event. A number of historians  underscores this
point, one example:

“I claim to be a historian. My approach to the classics is historical. And I tell you that the evidence for the life, the death, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ is better authenticated than most of the facts of modern history.”8

E. M. Blaiklock – Professor of Classics, Auckland University

Atheists can call the Bible a myth, but we all understand that is merely their wish, not reality.

 

A Heart Problem

After you exhaust all their arguments and demonstrate why their objections are wrong, illogical or don’t apply – don’t expect you’ll  have a happy convert. Typically they won’t be ready to pray the sinner’s prayer because these objections have all been a smoke  screen – a means of keeping the truth from themselves – that God exists, they’re a sinner and in need of his salvation. But what can they do? They can’t argue logically from their world view of atheism and evolution – it makes no sense. So what’s left? Typically what they resort to is this final tactic which I throw I throw in as a bonus.

8 The Ever Present Ad hominen Attacks

The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines this fallacy as:

Your reasoning contains this fallacy if you make an irrelevant attack on the arguer and suggest that this attack undermines the argument itself.

It typically manifests as attacks on your education, or your intelligence, or your understanding of any given theory.  Ignore such attacks. Or wear them as a badge of honor. Either way, the fact that atheists and evolutionists
use such attacks shows they have no rational argument to put forth and have resorted instead to attacking the messenger instead of dealing with the truth of the message. In such cases rational discourse is impossible – no point in attempting it. Simply speak the truth of the gospel, which they’ve probably already heard, then remind them again of the destiny of all men:

But they will have to give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.

1 Pet 4.5

 

Duane Caldwell | posted 9/28/2014 | Print Format Part 1

 


 

1 What Really Killed the Dinosaurs?, Science Channel documentary, 2005

2 Kent Hovind, The Creation Series

3 Crick has since backed away from that theory no doubt recognizing that a. It doesn’t really answer the question of the origin of DNA – just places it on another planet and thus b. demonstrates how desperate evolutionists are to explain DNA away – making up theories with absolutely no evidence behind them to explain away the powerful testimony of DNA.

4 Jonathan Wells documents much of this evidence in The Myth of Junk DNA (Seattle, Discovery Institute Press, 2011)

5 The full title of the reboot of the Cosmos Series is:
Cosmos – A Space Time Odysseys

6 The writings of the historian Josephus
(e.g. The Antiquities of the Jews, The War of the Jews) is a good example of this.

7 Jesus said:

I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
Matt 16.18

The church was created by Jesus and for him; thus it’s existence is a testimony to Jesus.
8 E. M. Blaiklock – referenced from:
Josh McDowell Evidences of Jesus Christ’s Resurrection:
http://focusonjerusalem.com/evidencefortheressurrection.html

Graphic: What Really Killed the Dinosaurs?, Science Channel documentary, 2005

 

3 thoughts on “GULO and other Irrational Atheist Arguments – Part 2

  1. Great post! We’ve all heard Darwinian arguments that dinosaur fossils, radiometric dating, genetic diversity and the “god particle” are clear evidence of evolution, an old Earth, the big bang, or all of tbe above. Usually, these statements are conclusory in nature or non sequiturs. When I patiently point out the circular logic of such statements, or describe with specificity how the argued topic actually proves the existence of God, Intelligent Design or a young Earth, that’s when they have to resort to character attacks.

  2. Simon – I think you nailed them. They tend to either beg the question or use some other logical fallacy, and when you point it out – do they rethink their position or even their argument? No they simply resort to attacks on you. Clearly they prefer following their godless religion in a posture of smug superiority – even if wrong – than humbly seeking the truth.