If i were to collect the entirety of the worlds evidence supporting evolution from fossil records, Transitional fossils
, DNA comparisons, ERV DNA
, Chimp Chromosome #13
and Bacterial resistance to antibiotics
and presented it to a creationist, Is it at all likely that the creationist would accept that evidence and then reject creation? No, That isn't likely at all.
Their religion has an explanation for the origin of man, God made us, So no science, No matter how conclusive the evidence is, Will ever be publicly accepted by someone who claims to believe the bible is the absolute truth.
The "god done it" answer has a number of flaws. Firstly it prohibits you from educating yourself. If "god done it" then any other answer, No matter how conclusive the evidence, Must be wrong. It is also an all encapsulating answer. Everything you don't understand can be answered with "god done it". So when you look at it like that it isn't really an answer at all, it's just an excuse for you to stop thinking about the question. It doesn't explain
anything, It doesn't put you another rung up the ladder of understanding and it certainly doesn't have any testable evidence.
Dinesh D'Souza, During a recent debate
with Daniel Dennett, Said the following about evidence;
"If i was arrested and tried for murder, And i knew i didn't commit that murder, Would any amount of evidence change my mind?"
This kind of attitude towards evidence, Evidence which contradicts what they think they know, shows what we are dealing with when we try to have a reasonable discussion with the religious. What Dinesh D'Souza is saying is that he has already come to a conclusion about god and that no amount of contradictory evidence is going to be able to change his mind.
Isn't this the definition of ignorance?
It's especially disingenuous when we have to sit through his facile "evidence" for god
. That's right, After the jumped up twerp who always looks like he is wearing someone else's clothes stands there and says he is going to disregard any evidence we put to him, He then has the audacity to expect us to listen to his own evidence, Supporting evidence which he searched for after
reaching his conclusion
So what's my point?
This disregard for evidence is ok if you are an adult, As far as i know it's still perfectly legal to be a idiot, And its even legal to demonstrate your idiocy to others (something that Dinesh D'Souza does regularly with the promotion of his books). So as far as i am concerned Dinesh D'Souza can disregard evidence that contradicts his opinion, Creationists can dismiss evidence that contradicts evolution and young earth nuts can dismiss evidence that says the earth is billions, Not thousands, Of years old. it makes no difference to me, To scientists or to the truth what these people think.
But it doesn't stop there. These people (providing they have bigger balls than their arguments do) have the capacity to reproduce. They may have children. Now the thing about children is they ask questions and they ask a lot of them. It is at this stage where the information that children receive has to be factual and it has to encourage them to ask even more questions, seeking greater understanding and clarity.
While "god done it" may be a satisfactory answer for an adult for a child it inhibits their understanding and prevents any more questions being asked.
If the answer you give to a child, And the answer to every conceivable question, Is "god done it", what other questions are left to answer? none are left to answer. Well, None except the questions that can be answered with "god works in mysterious ways" and "god has a plan for everyone".