Creationists are confused about science

Here’s a little comic from the creationist hub that is Answers in Genesis, and as you can see, the cartoonist seems deeply confused as to what believing in science actually means. He seems to think so long as you use technology in your every day life, you must somehow be a strong believer in the principles of science. By that logic, even a caveman using a lighter is “pro science”.

For most modern creationists, science is a relationship of convenience; they like things like antibiotics, automobiles, lasers, and computers, even though they reject any scientific findings which contradict their pre-supposed conclusions. As soon as they hear something they don’t like, or that puts their paper thin arguments to the test, they instantly reject/ignore  it. This is precisely WHY they are accused of not believing in science, they pick and choose what they like, and attack any findings that question their stupid beliefs about the origins of the Universe.

This comic highlights the serious difficulty secularists face when trying to argue the merits of science with creationists: they have absolutely no idea the science needed to create things such as antibiotics or microwaves instantly disproves their childish idea God created the Earth and all the animals some 6000 years ago.

Meanwhile, these people enjoy the luxuries of our ever increasing scientific understanding of the natural world while simultaneously undermining it with the annoying insistence that only the supernatural can explain the complexity of life. It’s not necessary to “believe” in science to benefit from it; after all, the vaccines I got as a child to protect me from measles and other deadly viruses worked, despite my ignorance.

So don’t pat yourselves on the back for benefiting from the advances in science, dear creationists, and don’t start thinking simply because you live in the information age, you’re automatically well informed. You aren’t, and it shows.

Comments (14)

  • avatar

    Isaac

    All science that is handy and makes their lives easier; they keep. All science that contradicts their delusions; they reject. Simple.

  • avatar

    Torrie

    This makes total sense, since they also cherry-pick the bible, well mainly they have their pastors or leaders, do it for them. Most Christians never read the bible, just as they never study Science. If they did both, we’d have no more Christians. Aww, wouldn’t that be a beautiful world!

    I challenge all Christians to read all the passages at biblegod.org and to read the book “God Hates You. Hate Him Back”. The latter is available on Amazon. Then, if you make it through that, go on to read Richard Dawkins’ “God Delusion”, “The Selfish Gene”, and “The Greatest Show On Earth” plus Christopher Hitchens’ “God Is Not Great”.

  • avatar

    Dr.Death

    I was confused when I read this comic too, but hey props to some delusional religions like the amish baptists who don’t use any modern technology, too bad this is on the internet so they can’t read this though.

  • avatar

    chocobar

    Go to the website and read threw the Top 10 myths about Creation. It’s pretty entertaining to hear them say they believe in science as long as it follows Gods word in the Bible.

  • avatar

    DuckPhup

    Robert Heinlein had something interesting to say about this…

    “We define thinking as integrating data and arriving at correct answers. Look around you. Most people do that stunt just well enough to get to the corner store and back without breaking a leg. If the average man thinks at all, he does silly things like generalizing from a single datum. He uses one-valued logic. If he is exceptionally bright, he may use two-valued, ‘either-or’ logic to arrive at his wrong answers. If he is hungry, hurt, or personally interested in the answer, he can’t use ANY sort of logic, and will discard an observed fact as blithely as he will stake his life on a piece of wishful thinking. He uses the technical miracles created by superior men without wonder or surprise, as a kitten accepts a bowl of milk. Far from ASPIRING to higher reasoning, he is NOT EVEN AWARE that higher reasoning EXISTS… yet he classes his own mental process as being of the same sort as the genius of an Einstein. Man is not a rational animal; he is a rationalizing animal.”

    “For explanations of a universe that confuses him, he seizes onto numerology, astrology, hysterical religions, and other fancy ways to go crazy. Having accepted such glorified nonsense, facts make no impression on him, even if at the cost of his own life. Joe, one of the hardest things to believe is the abysmal depth of human stupidity.” ~ Robert A. Heinlein – Kettle Belly Baldwin in Gulf from Assignment in Eternity

  • avatar

    joe

    With a 1.33ghz processor he might as well be living in Jesus’ time.

  • avatar

    toomanytribbles

    ‘we accepted the products of science; we rejected its methods.’
    - carl sagan from cosmos

  • avatar

    NIck

    Did Ed invent laser eye surgery? Or the internet? or the microprocessor?

    No.

    Scientists, i. e. people who beleive in evolution invented those things.

  • avatar

    Thundur Freyr

    @joe
    Yeah that struck me as well. Plus he has a digital internet connection

  • avatar

    Seth

    I’ve observed after many conversations with atheist that they often confuse religion with the belief that there might be intelligent design to the universe. They are not the same.

    Same as creationist and religion. Just because one creationist believes the earth is only 6000 years old doesn’t mean that everyone who believes in intelligent design does.

    Also the mistake is often made that because science can figure out certain phenomenon and re-create is in of itself proof that there is no higher power or conscious out there. Just because science can now create very basic forms of life in a lab doesn’t disprove intelligent design.

    I’ve often found that atheist themselves supporting scientific data (Note that I don’t say scientific proof.) that may argue for intelligent design.

    In the end, don’t confuse Christianity with the belief of some type of universal consciouses.

  • avatar

    Gillesp

    It’s funny how athiests degrade the intelligence of creationist but believe in a bunch of scientists that have diffrent
    theories that are always changing. I think science is great but
    It cannot disprove a grand creator. If anything it’s getting closer to
    proving that there is one.

  • avatar

    TheRichDarkEarth

    “It’s funny how athiests degrade the intelligence of creationist but believe in a bunch of scientists that have diffrent theories that are always changing.”

    The last part of that statement is typical: creationists (and most theists) want a final answer. Period. They want to know their place in the universe – at any cost, even the truth – and they want it to come from a perceived essence greater than themselves. But real scientists go where the evidence leads them. No preconceptions, no pre factum conclusions. As new evidence is uncovered, the scientific theories are confirmed, adjusted or thrown out altogether, and we move closer to understanding the world around us and our place in it. The fact that our understanding changes is immaterial.

    “It cannot disprove a grand creator.”
    Disproof assumes some sort of establish evidence of this grand creator’s existence.

  • avatar

    Ryan

    Now before we start throwing generalizations around, I’d like to say that there have been many, numerous brilliant scientists, authors, and researchers who have been atheists, and many who have been evolutionists, or theists, or and other type of “-ists.” Just saying that someone is a Christian does not instantly mean he/she rejects science or evidenced fact.

    However, I have yet to see any piece of science that firmly evidences against any universal intelligent design. In fact, it is difficult to even test for “Un-”intelligent design. As Seth said above, creating life in a laboratory, far from being evidence against an intelligent creator, can be taken as evidence for! Intelligent humans did the research and designed the experiment. Not a very strong argument, but a point I’d like to make none-the-less.

    In short, I find it hard to believe that science (The study of all things natural, as in, material) can even extend it’s influence to evidence against something fundamentally super-natural, above material.

    Just realized that this is probably a massive topic revive… haha… but just my thoughts.

  • avatar

    Англия Премьер-Лига

    What’s up, I want to subscribe for this weblog to obtain latest updates, therefore
    where can i do it please help.

Leave a Comment

Scroll to top