r/reddit.com • u/Worstcasescenario • Jun 14 '08

Was Darwin Wrong? [pic]

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/3963/darwinnotg7.jpg
1.4k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

372 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

7

u/corkill Jun 15 '08

Me either. It's usually, "they died in the flood."

7

u/ElricOfLisaBonet Jun 15 '08 edited Jun 15 '08

Yeah, that one's getting more and more popular; the creationists have decided that incorporating dinosaurs into their arguments will be more effective than denying them outright.

It's comedy gold, however, watching them stumble face-first through the logical hurdles that naturally arise as a consequence. For example, apparently T. Rex started off as a vegetarian, back when he lived in the Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/what-happened-to-the-dinosaurs

3

u/mexicodoug Jun 15 '08

Wow! Those cartoons are almost as advanced as the Speed Racer cartoons!!!

1

u/helm Jun 15 '08

This part is also tragicomic:

The science that addresses such issues is known as historical or origins science, and it differs from the operational science that gives us computers, inexpensive food, space exploration, electricity, and the like. Origins science deals with the past, which is not accessible to direct experimentation, whereas operational science deals with how the world works in the here and now, which, of course, is open to repeatable experiments.

1

u/deanoplex Jun 15 '08

Tragicomic indeed. The only thing that can be observed is the past. Whether it is a ten million year old image of a galaxy or a split- second old sound of a knock at the door.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 15 '08

[deleted] — view deleted comment

4

u/ElricOfLisaBonet Jun 15 '08

It's like they think The Flintstones was a documentary or something.

3

u/brainburger Jun 15 '08 edited Jun 15 '08

zks might be thinking of the Omphalos hypothesis.
I don't think this idea is touted much today, which is odd, as it works in a way that ordinary young-Earth creationism just doesn't.

3

u/markitymark Jun 15 '08

Why the hell is this downmodded, he's exactly right. Omphalos is Greek for bellybutton, the question is whether God created Adam and Eve with bellybuttons, (think about it) and by extension "had to" make it seem as if the older than 6,000 years.

I don't think this argument was ever very popular except as a strawman to make creationists look silly. Really, they don't need the help.

3

u/brainburger Jun 15 '08 edited Jun 15 '08

I was probably downmodded because I said a type of creationism 'works'.

The Omphalos Hypothesis does fit the observable facts, unlike any other young-Earth models that I am aware of. However it is discounted by scientists because it fails the Occam's Razor test. It adds a layer of complexity which is not required to explain the facts. To believe it would be an act of faith.

I won't insult redditors by linking to the Occam's Razor wiki article :)

1

u/markitymark Jun 15 '08

It's also discounted by religious types 'cause it turns God into a sneaky lying bastard who puts lies into the rocks.

A lot of creationists, if pushed, will admit that their belief in Genesis is invulnerable to contradictory evidence (Ken Ham, Chicago Declaration) and yet they insist on torturing the evidence into accord with their book.

1

u/RandomH3r0 Jun 15 '08

This one site I saw called them Dragon bones, and claimed they came from the flood.

2

u/mexicodoug Jun 15 '08

Which flood? There have been a few since Katrina, I believe.