First off both have not been proven correct, so as much as this asshole likes to insult one side, a theory is still a theory. I am neither side but you can't just take one side and say they are wrong, people on both side make fallacies. There is also the fact that this moron insults people through an article by only making his argument the only one. Have a little more respect for others views.
Richard Dawkins would be proud.
I agree with the arguments from a logical standpoint, but what a smug asshole.
Evolution... well, that makes sense. I agree, but only because the evidence so strongly supports the theory.
Big Bang? Not so sure. A direct quote from this article is:
"Also, there's nothing in the Big Bang Theory that suggests random chance. It simply happened. We don't know why, but it did."
Compelling? I think not.
From the page: Snails tend to abdorb minerals that they slide across.
I spent months of my life reviewing these fallacies in an argument and rhetoric class I had.
i love how ad hominem immediately contains one
There, there! There it is!
Logical fallacies and how to spot them.
I'm not a fan of neither evolution nor creationism, but this page is pretty stereotypical against creationisms. I can almost assure that if you go to youtube or any social network groups you'll find much more evolutionists preaching against the religious than vice versa.
I agree with everything said there. Not every religious person believes in creationism, as the poster 2 below me kindly points out, but then, the author of this article never states that either, and that it is an example of "The Strawman Attack" as stated in the article... the author is merely sarcastic about the religious ideals. However, the ones that are creationists do tend to use these "falsehoods" to their advantage.
pretty good guide to logical fallacies but my god, can you be any more smug. i bet the guy who wrote this weighs about 110 pounds and has a ponytail
Some good points here. I support any argument that exposes the religious blindness of creationism.