Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Question: As a creationist, how can you recognize a transitional fossil? Answer: when creationists can't agree which "kind" the specimen belongs to. [Spirituality & Religion]

A transitional fossil should show features which belong to the ancestral group and features which belong to the descendant group.
Creationists necessarily deny that these fossils exist but they expose the lie in their own argument when between them they cannot agree which "kind" a given fossils belongs in.
Is an Archaeopteryx a bird kind or a dinosaur kind? It has a mosaic of characteristics which makes it both.
Where do we draw the line between human kind and ape kind?

Well creationists just can't agree with each other which proves the fact that their features are so mosaic that they do indeed represent a transitional form between "kinds".


This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
DrWatson · 70-79, M
I am not a creationist. But I once heard a prominent televangelist give his explanation for fossil evidence or carbon dating evidence: it was created by Satan to mislead people into rejecting the Bible.

It is impossible to debate with creationists, conspiracy theorists, or delusional psychiatric patients, because they all have a superpower that you don't have: they can alter reality by their words. No evidence-based argument is any match for that.
@DrWatson

lol that's such a wild thing to say. But yeah, many of them do seem to genuinely just change what is real to them based on what they want to believe.
DrWatson · 70-79, M
@Pikachu I can't take credit for that thought. It's what G.K. Chesterton wrote in one of his books in the early 20th century. He was saying that it is a mistake to describe an insane person as having "lost his mind." He would argue that an insane person has only his mind -- and thus can refute whatever evidence you use to confront his delusions. He has his mind but has lost his humanity (as far as his delusions are concerned, that is.)

He goes on to say that one sign of sanity is the ability to hold contradictory ideas in tension with one another. An insane person must eliminate one of the two ideas in order to be purely, and perhaps cold-heartedly, logically consistent.