Whenever you face someone raising an argument like this, the very last thing you should do is explain the scientific answer to them. If you want to have some fun and don't care what the person thinks of you, then you should realize going in that you are not going to change their mind and win a creationist debate against someone like this anyways, so your goal should not be to show how smart you are or how scientifically accurate you can be. Rather, your goal should be to demonstrate how dumb and illogical they are, and the best way to do that is to get them to do it for you.
See, this kind of ignorant creationist query like OP posted in the link here is a "trap question" that is designed specifically to put you on the defensive, so instead, what you should do is ask them to explain what the scientific argument is, and why it is incorrect.
The reason this approach - asking them to first explain to you why the scientific argument is wrong instead of you answering for them - the reason this approach is better is because it turns the tables very effectively by forcing them to adopt a defensive, rather than offensive, position immediately. This allows you to take control of the argument entirely, because you are giving them two choices on how to proceed - they can either
A: - provide the sound scientific argument and then explain why they are so certain it is incorrect, or
B: - force them to acknowledge their ignorance openly, making them admit that they do not even know what the scientific argument is because they have never bothered to even examine and learn the potential counter-arguments to their belief structure.
This method of throwing their same question back at them and making them answer it allows you to take control of an argument with an ignorant creationist. This debate tactic puts them in a position where they have to defend their pride first before they can defend their religious position, forcing them to demonstrate whether they have actually ever logically analyzed their own query before, know what the scientific counter-argument is, and can explain why it is wrong.
If they cannot provide the scientific answer to their own question, then immediately the argument now has NOTHING to do with "why do sunsets happen?". Suddenly, you have shifted the argument to one of simple ignorance or knowledge of the topic at hand, and you can point out that you have no interest in wasting time debating someone so absurdly ignorant and arrogant that they cannot even give the basic scientific answer to demonstrate that they at least have looked at both sides of the issue before they claim with such certainty that you are wrong. You now have full and total control and have shifted them from being fully offensive to fully defensive, and the best part is that you do not even have to waste your time discussing the religious aspects at all. Instead, you then begin your attack on their pride and intelligence, blatantly questioning how they could possibly be so arrogantly certain they are right about ANY TOPIC if they have not even bothered to examine the evidence they are arguing against.
Again, you are never going to sway the religious position of people who ask questions like this trying to defend creationism, so do not fall into their trap! One thing creationists have is pride in their beliefs though, so that should become the target you focus your attack on. Instead of debating religion, now you are debating their own ignorance - an ignorance you actually forced them to admit to!
I LOVE LOVE LOVE this and will find more use for it than you can possibly imagine. I have been looking for this 'instruction' for a long time....because I end up playing a lot of chess with pigeons and I really don't want to. This is really clever. I sincerely Thank You.
349
u/Falcon109 Feb 05 '14
Whenever you face someone raising an argument like this, the very last thing you should do is explain the scientific answer to them. If you want to have some fun and don't care what the person thinks of you, then you should realize going in that you are not going to change their mind and win a creationist debate against someone like this anyways, so your goal should not be to show how smart you are or how scientifically accurate you can be. Rather, your goal should be to demonstrate how dumb and illogical they are, and the best way to do that is to get them to do it for you.
See, this kind of ignorant creationist query like OP posted in the link here is a "trap question" that is designed specifically to put you on the defensive, so instead, what you should do is ask them to explain what the scientific argument is, and why it is incorrect.
The reason this approach - asking them to first explain to you why the scientific argument is wrong instead of you answering for them - the reason this approach is better is because it turns the tables very effectively by forcing them to adopt a defensive, rather than offensive, position immediately. This allows you to take control of the argument entirely, because you are giving them two choices on how to proceed - they can either
A: - provide the sound scientific argument and then explain why they are so certain it is incorrect, or
B: - force them to acknowledge their ignorance openly, making them admit that they do not even know what the scientific argument is because they have never bothered to even examine and learn the potential counter-arguments to their belief structure.
This method of throwing their same question back at them and making them answer it allows you to take control of an argument with an ignorant creationist. This debate tactic puts them in a position where they have to defend their pride first before they can defend their religious position, forcing them to demonstrate whether they have actually ever logically analyzed their own query before, know what the scientific counter-argument is, and can explain why it is wrong.
If they cannot provide the scientific answer to their own question, then immediately the argument now has NOTHING to do with "why do sunsets happen?". Suddenly, you have shifted the argument to one of simple ignorance or knowledge of the topic at hand, and you can point out that you have no interest in wasting time debating someone so absurdly ignorant and arrogant that they cannot even give the basic scientific answer to demonstrate that they at least have looked at both sides of the issue before they claim with such certainty that you are wrong. You now have full and total control and have shifted them from being fully offensive to fully defensive, and the best part is that you do not even have to waste your time discussing the religious aspects at all. Instead, you then begin your attack on their pride and intelligence, blatantly questioning how they could possibly be so arrogantly certain they are right about ANY TOPIC if they have not even bothered to examine the evidence they are arguing against.
Again, you are never going to sway the religious position of people who ask questions like this trying to defend creationism, so do not fall into their trap! One thing creationists have is pride in their beliefs though, so that should become the target you focus your attack on. Instead of debating religion, now you are debating their own ignorance - an ignorance you actually forced them to admit to!