Top 25 Creationist Fallacies

ExtantDodo, YouTube atheist and evolutionary educator, Has a great video exposing the top 25 fallacious arguments used by cretinists along with examples and an explanation why they are fallacious. You will probably recognise most of these from any unfortunate encounters you have had with cretinists, But the video will definitely help you spot more in the future.

My advice is to never debate someone when the basis of their argument is fallacious, Simply point out the fallacy, explain why it's a flawed argument and request that they make a different, More logical and coherent point.

Isn't it ironic that the same people who try to convince us that our morality comes from their religion are also the most deceitful, devious and dishonest.

Unconvincing Arguments For The Existence Of God[s]

Minnesota Atheists Public Relations Officer August Berkshire has been working on and revising his list of "Unconvincing Arguments for God" [PDF] and the list has grown to be 34 items long including precise reasons why these facile arguments are flawed and why Atheists find it hard to take them seriously.

In this post i am going to take a handful of the unconvincing arguments and explain to the believers why the arguments shouldn't be made and why they are so easy to destroy.

God of gaps

The god of gaps argument is often thrown in at short notice when an Atheist or scientists says "I don't know". The assumption of the person making this argument is that if something can't be explained by science, that alone is evidence that god done it.

Evolution wouldn't favor a false belief

This argument goes something like "why would evolution favor a species incapable of seeing reality?". Of course this argument is flawed to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with evolution. Evolution doesn't favor the truth, It favors what if beneficial. God can be used to keep people behaving well, Much like santa does in children, And religion has been used in the past for controlling groups, Armies and societies. So where it is beneficial, Evolution will favor it, Regardless of how true it is.

Altruism

Some arguments are made that altruism is evidence of god because evolution rewards only selfish behaviour. While it is true that evolution does tend to reward selfish behaviour altruistic behaviour is evolutionary beneficial because it creates a more harmonious society. Evolution has taken advantage of the fact that if everyone is willing to help others there is more chance of the individual receiving help when they need it.

The “Fine-tuning” of the Universe

Some religious people argue that the six physical constants of the universe can only exist within a very narrow range to produce a universe capable of sustaining life. Therefore, since this couldn’t have happened “by accident,” a god must have done it. Again, this is a god-of-the-gaps argument. But beyond that, this argument assumes that we know everything about astrophysics – a field in which new discoveries are made on almost a daily basis. We may discover that our universe is not so “fine tuned” after all.

Another possibility is that there may exist multiple universes – either separately or as “bubble universes” within a single universe. Each of these universes could have its own set of constants. Given enough universes, by chance it is likely that at least one will produce and sustain life.

Pascal's Wager

Pascals wager sates that we have everything to gain and nothing to lose by believing in god. This is flawed for two reasons.
1) pascal assumes that someone can force themselves to believe something based on the inferred consequences of not believing.
2) Even if the wager is right, it doesn't do anything for proving that there is a god, Only that believing it might be best based on the consequences.

Pascals wager can be used as an argument for believing anything where disbelief results in punishment.

False Dichotomies

A false dichotomy is an argument that assumes only two answers are possible (if X is wrong then god done it) and is also an extension of the "god of gaps" argument. The false dichotomy argument is most common in arguments presented by creationists. In these argument the creationist never presents any evidence for their own position and only ever seeks to refute evolution (if evolution is wrong, god done it).

Religious people have a tough, if not impossible task to try to prove a god exists, let alone that their particular religion is true. If any religion had objective standards, wouldn’t everyone be flocking to the same “true” religion?
Instead we find that people tend to believe, to varying degrees, the religion in which they were indoctrinated. Or they are Atheists.

The Atheist Test

I have just stumbled across this monstrosity of an illogical argument from the worlds dumbest christian and i just have to address it.

Ray Comfort, The banana guy (yeah, That idiot), Presents a test to atheists, The test consists of two questions and goes something like this.
Question one: Do you know the weight of sand on all the beaches of Hawaii?
Question two: Do you know the number of hairs on the back of a fully grown male Tibetan Yak?

Did you answer "no" to both? I know i did. The point Ray Comfort is so fatuously making is that nobody knows everything (even though science could find the answers). Then Ray uses the obvious fact that nobody knows everything to present the argument that in all the knowledge you don't posses there could be evidence that god does exist.

Well, Yes, A lot of things are possible Ray. It's possible that i will win the lottery tomorrow, It's possible that the sun won't rise, it's possible that the moon will disappear. the thing is Ray, Reasonable people don't live their lives, base their politics, Start wars and raise their children based on what is "possible".
Reasonable people don't mutilate their child's genitals, Cut peoples heads off and bomb abortion clinics based on what is "possible".

So here's test for the religious;
Question #1: Do you know what i had for breakfast?
Question #2: Do you know how many blades of grass are on the planet?

Well surely, if you admit that there is a lot that you don't know you must admit that in there somewhere may possibly be evidence that your god, Or anyone elses, Doesn't exist.

This is where it gets tricky for the religious. Because rational atheists have no problem admitting that there may be a god, After all anything is possible and the atheists main point is that there is no evidence for god. But it's a lot harder for someone who claims to be a believer to admit that they may be wrong.

Between this nonsense and his insane banana argument I'm surprised christians haven't told Ray to shut the fuck up and go away. Even they must see what a moron this guys is. Seriously, He does nothing but harm to your cause by presenting these incorrect, Illogical and fatuous arguments as evidence that his super-buddy-in-the-sky exists.

Top 10 Logical Fallacies Used By Religion

For those who don't know, A logical fallacy is a flawed pattern of reasoning. Something which the religious are professionals at.

In this post I'm going to list my favorite ten logical fallacies used by the religious in arguments. I'll also post their meaning and an example of what the fallacy may look like when used in an argument. I'm sure most of you free-thinkers will recognise many of these from past discussions with religious people.

#1. Argumentum ad ignorantium - Fallacy that something must be true because it has not been, Or can't be, proven false.
If you can't prove that god doesn't exist, That means he must exist.

#2. Argumentum ad misericordia - Appealing to pity.
Why are you so intent on destroying something that makes so many sick children happy!

#3. Argumentum ad nauseum - Fallacy that something is likely to be true the more often it is said.
God exists, How many times do i have to tell you?

#4. Argumentum ad novitatem - Fallacy that something is right because it's new.
Of course Islam is the true religion, Mohammad is the most recent prophet.

#5. Argumentum ad populum - Fallacy that something is correct based on the amount of people who believe it.
Look how many people believe in Jesus, They can't all be wrong.

#6. Bifurcation - Fallacy of presenting a situation as having only two answers.
Evolution is wrong, So that means creationism is right.

#7. Circular Logic - The premise that what you are trying to prove is evidence of it's self.
The bible is the word of god because it says it is, And it can't be wrong, because after all, It is the word of god.

#8. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc - Fallacy of asserting that events occurring simultaneously must be causally related.
With all these natural disasters happening how can you deny that god isn't punishing us?

#9. Plurium interrogationum - Fallacy of demanding a simplistic answer to a complex question.
If god didn't create the universe then explain what did.

#10. Slippery slope fallacy - Fallacy that one event will inevitably lead to harmful consequences.
If we let gays get married it will be the end of family values.

There are many more but these are my favorites and most commonly used logical fallacies in discussions with religious people.

if you have any more with examples please post them in a reply and I'll add them to the list.