We see creationists here claiming to know that the experts are all wrong... even when the creationists themselves are admittedly ignorant of the subject matter. It seems that if you read the bible and have "common sense," that you can critique the experts on stuff you know nothing about. How exactly, does this work?
Here are some examples for those who will claim I am making this up. These are only examples and I am not trying to single anyone out:
Jazer is not an expert on genetics, but he has the ability to "know bull when he sees it" when it comes to genetics. It doesn't matter that he doesn't even know what a gene or a mutation is.
Dad is not an expert on either atronomy, cosmology, or geology, but he knows when what the experts say is an "in the fish bowl, anti-god lie." He sees what others do not when it comes to everything from the distance to the nearest stars to the center of the earth. Not that any of it provides a shred of practical data, of course, but that doesn't matter.
AVET and his pastor are not experts on geology, but they know the earth was created 6,100 years ago with billions of years of "embedded age." It doesn't matter that neither one can tell us what "embedded age" is or how God embedded age, or why he bothered to embed age in the first place.
The list goes on and on. My question is this. If creationists insist that they can critique experts on stuff they know nothing about, then why should we take anything they say about any subject, including the bible, seriously?