The case against creationists and religious fundamentalism

case against creationists

case against creationists
Religious fundamentalists really do have a habit of wearing down on those of us in the scientific community. They tend to say something nonsensical and disingenuous, then when people point it out they either don’t respond or when they do, it’s often always the same rhetoric some other fool quoted, just in a different religious context. The typical quote: “I have proof of God and (insert religious passage) and you need to believe because of some outlandish or obscure claim, then insert a logical fallacy or Pascal’s wager, or even better talk about some anecdotal nonsense. Then they claim that because they ‘feel’ something which they interpret as the presence of a god is evidence enough and that we are damned to some ill fate for not believing.” -end typical quote. We’ve all seen it, it’s the same argument every time, just a different religion or slightly adjusted for the circumstances. And they all claim they have all the answers and the rest are wrong.  

Now, what determines what is actually right are reproducible results, 1+1=2 no matter what your beliefs are. We can prove through reproducible evidence what the age of the universe is (roughly 13 billion years old), through reproducible evidence we can prove the age of the earth (roughly 4.6 billion years old), through reproducible evidence we know evolution is a fact, and through reproducible evidence we can prove that humans evolved from primates . We know through the theory of relativity how gravity interacts with objects, we know how to calculate the fissile rate of a nuclear reactor through thermal dynamics and particle physics. The laws of science are established through the understanding of our natural world. We live in an era where legitimate information is readily available and there is NO excuse for not knowing this stuff.

Attributing the laws of nature and what we don’t yet understand, to a sort of higher power and in conjunction, to primitive nonfactual texts, means that you have little to no understanding of what the actual facts are. There are an estimated 5,000 gods and goddesses worshiped by humanity, and those deities/beliefs that are worshiped are in direct relation to the persons upbringing and physical location. We can plainly see that religious ideologies are in fact a man made creation attempting to explain a world that they didn’t have the capacity nor ability to understand at their point of origin.

As to what we don’t know, which is an ever receding line drawn in the sand, the concept of God will recede with it. This is what is known as the God of the Gaps fallacy and we see this constantly throughout history. A prime example of this is Galileo vs. the Catholic church. So this is why the concepts in religion are being so quickly discarded, people are coming to a greater understanding by becoming educated and thusly so, causing religion to not only be exposed for the primitive, non factual bigotry that it is, but to be completely dismissed by the majority of the intellectual community as well.

Science may not be able to completely prove a god doesn’t exists, just as much as one cannot disprove a flying spaghetti monster watches over us either. But what we can rationally assume is that the over exaggerated claims, historical inaccuracies, scientific impossibilites, mathematical errors, unethical/immoral values, blatant lack of proof for made claims, and contradictory claims, lead us (or should if you are of reasonable intelligence) to only one conclusion; there is no God and to assert there’s one, shows one’s inability to discern that. However members of any given religion do not even share the same beliefs, spiritual over literal, fundamentalist against moderate they all believe slightly different words of god whilst espousing its infallible word. The fallibility of supreme being’s infallible word, the impotence of this omnipotence is a telling argument against it’s against creationists

If the scientific, historical, and factual evidence don’t agree with your beliefs, you need to change your beliefs. When you believe in something that is contradictory to this, you are delusional. When enough people believe in the same delusion, that is what’s called religion. The reason why scientists and intellectuals don’t respect religion is because religion disrespects human intelligence, that is why we ridicule it. Religion is currently in its death throes and should be allowed to fade away so we as humanity can move on to bigger and better things.

Related Articles


  1. Hey there, You have done an excellent job. I will definitely digg it and personally suggest to my friends. I’m sure they’ll be benefited from this site.

  2. As a skeptic, I use the following argument dialogues with fundamentalists. I suggest that they simply read the first nineteen verses of the Bible. The first three of these verses talk about the beginning when darkness covered the face of the earth and go on to say that God created light, distinguished the light from the darkness. and called the light day and the darkness night.

    The following verses describe the first four days of God’s creation and on the fourth day state that God created the sun, the moon, and the stars. That leaves us with the question of where the light came from on the first day. Furthermore we now know that the transitions between day and night are caused by the rotation of the earth so that we are alternately facing the sun and facing away from it.

    The foregoing argument indicates that the writer of Genesis was ignorant about elementary astronomy and elementary logic. And if we find logical fallacy in the first few verses of the Bible what reason do we have to expect truth in the remainder of the Bible

Comments are closed.