'Debating' a creationist (part 3)

Oks this is the last round. The latest video of venomfangx is a bunch of rambling fallacies loosely tied together. Indeed you could spend half an hour just untangling his latest video, and it would serve little purpose, and would really be quite dull...
For example, hes wrong from the first line about 'unless you can validate a theory its useless'. You cannot 'validate' a theory..... Well exactly, if they guy doesn't even understand the scientific method, whats the point in explaining why his implementation of what he doesn't understand is wrong!
His second line is wrong too, about it being untestable if the inside of watermelons are blue.
Well infact hes even wrong on his premise.... Color is due to the light you receive from an object. The inside of the watermelon has no light, therefore it has no color, neither red or blue!
However the pigment molecules are there, and you could monitor these by a non-invasive method such as nmr.
Incidentally, VFX just copied this argument off Hovind. When Hovind used it it was bull too! Ahh the joy of being able to think for yourself rather than just parrot idiots eh venom!!
Anyways, venom is obviously an attention whore, and while I have no problem in using him as a poster boy for creationists stupidity (a role in which he actually plays a beneficial role for civilization), he seems to be laboring under the delusion that I have nothing better to do than explain to him why hes wrong on almost everything he says.
....so in an attempt to draw a line under this and get back to actually doing something useful myself, I have simply called for a straight up vote.
Clips from:
Apollo 11, intel 45nm tech, DNA molecular visualization and others, used for educational purposes.

Visitor Comments Add a comment…