More Bible-Bangin' Fun at Work

Jackie Mason | July 15, 2003
[hidden by request]

Lori Lancaster | July 15, 2003
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | July 16, 2003
Good points. I give the woman credit for deciding that it's not her place to judge another person's private behavior despite her beliefs, which is more than I can say for a lot of people.

But because of cave drawings, she's convinced that human beings actually saw dinosaurs in the flesh? Most children draw pictures of fanciful creatures of their imaginations, and some adults even make a good living at it. Fire-breathing dragons have been drawn since early man; does that mean they once existed? What about mermaids and fairies? Now, it would be fair to argue that dinosaurs were definitely real and that the other creatures are not, but that still doesn't prove that the cave drawings were actually drawn by eyewitnesses. How can a woman who has clearly given this some thought believe in a puddle of evidence for creation and ignore an ocean of evidence for evolution?

Scott Hardie | July 16, 2003
Perhaps I was unfair with that last sentence. Let me ask instead: Why does she take the cave drawings, which are unverifiable and inconclusive, to be proof of creation, and say that the lineage of pre-human skeletons, which is verifiable and conclusive, is "not enough proof" of evolution? I guess because she believes what she wants to believe, and the evidence doesn't matter. (Insert Bush comment here.) Another question: Even if the cave drawings were really drawn by humans who saw dinosaurs alive, why is that proof for creation and not for evolution?

Jackie Mason | July 16, 2003
[hidden by request]

Scott Hardie | July 18, 2003
False dichotomy: "You either believe in the Bible and creation, or you are an atheist and don't believe in creation." Actually, there are plenty of other possibilities.

Argumentum ad verecundiam: "Evolution doesn't make sense cause the Bible says differently." Authority can be useful when it's the only way to know something, but we have other methods.

Converse accident: "Evolution is a bunch of bullshit just because mistakes were made." You can't induce that definitive of a conclusion from such scant evidence. If your premises are weak, your argument is unsound.

Red herring: "Why are we worrying about dinosaurs with such pertinant problems in this world? .... Because of evolution, people are less likely to listen to the Bible and that's why these problems occur." Suggesting that evolution causes societal problems does not mean that evolution is not true.

Just cause I feel like it: "The dinosaurs were too big to fit on the ark." If the Bible is your authority on this subject, could you please tell me what passage says that?

And this is without attacking the guy's web site, which is riddled with more idiotic, illogical, unsubstantiated arguments.

Erik Bates | July 18, 2003
[hidden by request]

Jackie Mason | July 20, 2003
[hidden by request]