1. Fuzzy Words
Use of fuzzy words demonstrates that evolutionists do not have the evidence to support their claims.
That's how science works. Scientists are not allowed to say anything for certain, they can only make conjectures on the evidence at hand and make models which predict phenonmenon. You may want to try reading some science papers, there is no scientist that will say, 'It is an infallible truth that...". Those darn scientists!
2. Half Truth
Example: The Second Law of Thermodynamics only applies to isolated systems, so it is not relevant to evolution, because the earth is an open system
Earth is an open system, we get energy from the sun. Second Law is not applicable to evolution---try talking to some biophysicists.
3. Bandwagon
The appeal to everyone agrees
Example: All scientists accept evolution
No real scientist accepts creation
To see a list of scientists that believe in a literal 6-day creation got to: www.AnswersInGenesis.org
I want to annouce RIGHT NOW I will bet anyone $100 that the science establishment DO accept evolution as cornerstone of evolution. Check out the National Academy of Sciences site on evolution:
http://nationalacademies.org/evolution/
Check out a poll taken on scientists and their stance on evolution:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
Only 5% of scientists take a creationist view but they also include those in nonrelated fields that do not utilize evolution such as computer science. And you want to see list of scientists who accept evolution...I believe they only allow those named 'Steve' to sign those, they are up to 577 now I believe. But there is a better list from the landmark court case of
Edwards v. Aguillard where the Supreme Court ruled public schools cannot teach creationism alongside evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/edwards-v-aguillard/amicus1.html
A legal brief signed by
72 US nobel laureates,
17 state academies of science and
7 other major science organizations in support of teaching only evolution in a science classroom. Yes, they must be in the tiny, tiny minority. Those wacky scientists!
4. Glittering Generalities
A broad oversimplification of an explanation
Example: Scientists may disagree about the mechanism of evolution, but all agree that evolution is a fact.
Wrong. No one says evolution is a fact, it is a theory. The beauty of evolution is that it is a simple explanation for a wide range of phenomenon in nature. Scientists disagree about the
minor details of evolution, but most agree it is happening.
5. Loaded Words
Using emotionally-charged words to influence a reaction
Example: Creationism is a tactic by the Christian right to force their religious agenda on our children
Know of any atheists who advocate creationism? Do you have any proof that creationism is a science? Papers? Research? Predicative models?
6. Association
Associating something you want to criticize with something people dislike
Example: Associating creation in the same sentence with astrology or known myths
Hey, if it quacks like a duck.....
7. Ridicule
Attempting to provoke a dislike against a person or idea by name-calling
Example: Creationists are troglodytes and flat-earthers
Of course, creationists never call 'evolutionists' bad names. It's not like any good creationists have ever accused evolutionists of being immoral atheists, or godless scientists out to corrupt the morals of our youth.
8. Circumstantial Evidence
Assuming physical evidences are related
Example: We are here therefore we must have evolved (this is often the best evidence used to support evolution)
Example: Fossil horses arranged into an evolutionary sequence
Ohhhhh....because science works when we see something, anything we don't directly see means didn't happen----better tell those chemists and physicists their work is bunk! Those darn forensic scientists going around saying this or that person committed the crime! They weren't there! They can't possibly have other ways of deducing whodunit!
9. Either-Or Fallacy
Presenting only one possible solution when others are justified
Example: If we teach creation then we will have to teach every other creation myth
Not sure what to say to this....if we teach biblical creationism...why would we NOT teach Hindu and Buddha creationist stories as well? Equal time for all....
10. Analogy
Improperly drawing parallels while ignoring pertinent differences
Example: Evolution is a fact like digestion or gravity
Evolution is not a fact. Please get YOUR facts straight. Better yet, do a search on the difference between fact, theory, and hypothesis.
11. Authority
Relying on authority rather than logic and evidence
Example: Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution
Example: Citing one scholar who claims the days of Genesis could have been long ages
Those wacky scientists! Why should we have scientists in charge of science?! Having religious leaders in charge of science has worked out so well for most of human history.
12. Extrapolation
Assuming a trend beyond what the data permits
Example: Radioactive dating methods prove the earth is 4.6 billion years old
Example: Mutations are the mechanism for evolution
Uh...it's what scientists do...intepretate data. We even get to do a lot of that in grad school. Crazy, crazy scientists.....
13. Best-in-Field Fallacy
An appeal to overlook discrepancies in a theory
Example: We dont have all the answers, but evolution is the best model we have
That's how science works. We have a model, if it can make predications, we accept it until it fails at a predication, then we modify it. Evolution has undergone this process for 150 years....seems like it has served biologists pretty well....
14. Shifting the Burden of Proof
Forgetting that it is your responsibility to prove a claim, not your opponents to disprove it
Example: Claiming that creation has no proof and therefore should not be taught, when evolution has never been proven or is even capable of proof
Come to my mom's lab.
15. Ad Hominem
Attacking the person instead of the argument
Example: Asserting that creationists are ultra-conservative, do not have real degrees, or are liars
Example: Accusing creationists of quoting out of context when they did not
Quack! Quack!
So Dr. Hovind got his degree where...?!
16. Equivocation
Confusing the issue by using vague terms or changing the definitions of words
Example: Changing the definition of science to support only evolution
Example: Not clearly defining terms such as natural selection or macroevolution
I have no problem understanding science terms, but then again maybe I'm just some kind of genius.
17. Card Stacking
Listing all the points in your favor while ignoring the serious points against it
Example: Pouncing on one item by your opponent but ignoring the major points of his/her argument
Example: Trying to prove evolution using finch beaks or antibiotic resistant bacteria but ignoring all the problems
Well, if you think there are problems, stop debating and starting doing some serious research. In science, debates are not done at the podium, it's done in the labs. Publish! Publish! Publish!
18. Bluffing
Appearing to know more than you do
Example: Making the claim that the fossil record is full of transitional fossils
Example: Dinosaurs evolved into birds
You are right, it's ridiculous to think scientists may know more about science than me....we should close down all those stupid medical schools, dumb doctors who think they know more about medicine than we do....
19. Appeasement
The appeal that we're not really so different
Example: Most religions dont have a problem with evolution
Well, it's true. :~)
20. Visualization
Using imagery to mislead or to substitute for evidence
Example: The evolutionary tree of life
Example: The geologic column
Example: Reconstruction of alleged apemen
Yeah, using data to prove something. We all know that's not how true science operates! Real scientists uses the Bible to find all the answers! Vaccines! Antibotics! Germ Theory! They were all discovered through rigorous readings of the Bible!
