Starting from the top down of Loudmouth's list, here is a rough summary of the arguments used. They are all pretty old hat. I won't go into detail on each argument since most of these have been discussed in depth elsewhere on the board.
Dr. Paul Giem, chemist, uses these arguments: Piltdown man, refutation of Miller/Urey, Denial of radiometric dating, evolution as belief
Jeremy L Walter, mechanical engineer, uses these arguments: the past is not observable, 2nd law of thermodynamics, first cause, Mt. St. Helens ash flows comparing to Grand Canyon, Bible is the word of God because the Bible says so.
Jerry R. Bergman, psycologist, uses these arguments: False dilemma (evolution vs creation), equivocation (evolution with atheism), Irreducible Complexity, Embedded Age, Genetic information cannot increase, probability of random generation, life cannot come from nonlife.
John K.G. Kramer, biochemist, uses these arguments: False Dilemma (evolution or religion), no new genetic information, no macroevolution, irreducible complexity, argument from incredulity, claims scripture inspires work, 2nd law of thermodynamics, argument by design
Henry Zuil, biologist, uses these arguments: Irreducible complexity
Jonathan D. Sarfati, chemist, uses these arguments: the past is not observable, evolution as belief, strawman (quote "This atheistic bias is ironic, because the whole basis for modern science depends on the assumption that the universe was made by a rational Creator"), slippery slope (evolution causes sin), irreducible complexity.
Ariel A. Roth, biologist, uses these arguments: evolution as belief, irreducible complexity, no beneficial mutations, no transitional fossils, cambrian explosion, catastrophism explains geological formations, Flood as explanation for sediment layers and fossils, appeal to authority
Notice any common themes here? That's all the essays I have time to read for now.
Dr. Paul Giem, chemist, uses these arguments: Piltdown man, refutation of Miller/Urey, Denial of radiometric dating, evolution as belief
Jeremy L Walter, mechanical engineer, uses these arguments: the past is not observable, 2nd law of thermodynamics, first cause, Mt. St. Helens ash flows comparing to Grand Canyon, Bible is the word of God because the Bible says so.
Jerry R. Bergman, psycologist, uses these arguments: False dilemma (evolution vs creation), equivocation (evolution with atheism), Irreducible Complexity, Embedded Age, Genetic information cannot increase, probability of random generation, life cannot come from nonlife.
John K.G. Kramer, biochemist, uses these arguments: False Dilemma (evolution or religion), no new genetic information, no macroevolution, irreducible complexity, argument from incredulity, claims scripture inspires work, 2nd law of thermodynamics, argument by design
Henry Zuil, biologist, uses these arguments: Irreducible complexity
Jonathan D. Sarfati, chemist, uses these arguments: the past is not observable, evolution as belief, strawman (quote "This atheistic bias is ironic, because the whole basis for modern science depends on the assumption that the universe was made by a rational Creator"), slippery slope (evolution causes sin), irreducible complexity.
Ariel A. Roth, biologist, uses these arguments: evolution as belief, irreducible complexity, no beneficial mutations, no transitional fossils, cambrian explosion, catastrophism explains geological formations, Flood as explanation for sediment layers and fossils, appeal to authority
Notice any common themes here? That's all the essays I have time to read for now.
Upvote
0