But, a 747 didn't come about from a whirlwind in a junkyard! Therefore, god.

Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 411
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
But, a 747 didn't come about from a whirlwind in a junkyard! Therefore, god.

We've all heard that argument before. Be it a 747 in a junkyard, a car with no maker, a painting with no painter (the latter 2 used by Ray Comfort in the very debate that brought me to this site). We of course know the argument is ridiculous. However, has anyone ever countered with something like the following?

Yes, paintings require painters, cars require manufacturers, as do 747s. In fact, I could show you that painters paint paintings, that automotive manufacturers manufacture cars, and that Boeing manufactures 747s. However, where did YOU come from yourself Mr. or Mrs. Creationist?

You came from your mother, requiring your father's sperm and ~9 months to make the process work. Now, you got half your DNA from each parent.

The point here is, if a creationist can say that "a painting requires a painter", that can be rather simply countered with "an organism requires (a) parent(s)" (depending on whether or not they can reproduce asexually). Often when arguing these things, it's important to be short and concise and correct, only elaborating when somebody says something absolutely stupid that requires specifics to be given.

Of course I think a creationist response would be something stupid like "Jesus didn't have an Earthly biological father" or the default "were you there?" Then you could perhaps hit them with something comical to hit a person with, such as a trout.

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15732
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
This is cherry picking. Lets

This is cherry picking. Lets say we agreed with them, which we do not, they would still have the problem with two things. WHICH GOD? Then if everything has a creator then something even more complex created that creator, then something even more complex created that creator and so on and so on and so on.

 

They really don't believe this shit in every context. They reject rightfully Thor making lightening or the sun being a god. They don't need an ocean god to create a hurricane.

They simply cant stand that science is leaving their sky hero claim in the dust.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Jabberwocky wrote:We've all

Jabberwocky wrote:

We've all heard that argument before. Be it a 747 in a junkyard, a car with no maker, a painting with no painter (the latter 2 used by Ray Comfort in the very debate that brought me to this site). We of course know the argument is ridiculous. However, has anyone ever countered with something like the following?

Yes, paintings require painters, cars require manufacturers, as do 747s. In fact, I could show you that painters paint paintings, that automotive manufacturers manufacture cars, and that Boeing manufactures 747s. However, where did YOU come from yourself Mr. or Mrs. Creationist?

You came from your mother, requiring your father's sperm and ~9 months to make the process work. Now, you got half your DNA from each parent.

The point here is, if a creationist can say that "a painting requires a painter", that can be rather simply countered with "an organism requires (a) parent(s)" (depending on whether or not they can reproduce asexually). Often when arguing these things, it's important to be short and concise and correct, only elaborating when somebody says something absolutely stupid that requires specifics to be given.

Of course I think a creationist response would be something stupid like "Jesus didn't have an Earthly biological father" or the default "were you there?" Then you could perhaps hit them with something comical to hit a person with, such as a trout.

Rofl.
You know, the best scientific answer would be that a whirlwind can never build an aircraft because a whirlwind doesn't have the necessary elements one would need. There's never even sufficient heat to mold metal into the right pieces, so you can't even get parts for the aircraft, let alone an actual aircraft. I always have to wonder just how ignorant of biology someone is in order to be able to compare a crafted item to a living thing.
Life is made up of chemicals that naturally bond together. Paint is not, it must be manufactured. Metal must be separated from stone, then refined, and then it can be shaped. There is absolutely no comparison between life and the things life can create.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.