I've been going to a 12 week viewing of Ken Ham's laughable "Foundations" DVD series at a Presbyterian church. I've seen the first 3 so far. Ugh, it's getting worse each time. So many misrepresentations of science and skepticism. It's jam packed with logical failures, just like the one in the sign.
We talk about this on my Facts Before Faith podcast (episode 5). I have a group on Atheist Nexus for the podcast. Feel free to listen and comment.
I've told this story on AN before, but my husband's cousin once dated a girl whose father "Didn't believe in dinosaurs" because they are not mentioned in the bible. WTF??????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Funny! The point is, the desert warlords who claimed to have divinely received the O.T. with its do this and don't do that, would not have known a dinosaur bone from an elephant's; they had no knowledge of paleontology period. A discipline that would not even come along for three or four thousand years. The jokester is merely betraying his or her ignorance, since the extinction of dinosaurs occurred 200 million years earlier. Duh!
I know, right? What a moron! I'm glad my husband's cousin dumped the girl! Who would want a father-in-law like THAT? lol
I've had some creationists tell me that the devil put the dinosaur bones there to deceive man.
My ex-father-in-law believed that. Glad I can say ex.
This whole rhetorical method bothers me, and believers are the worst offenders. What is written on the sign is neither a question nor a statement. It's more of an accusation of conflict. People who are frustrated by English might ask, "Why do you drive on a parkway and park on a driveway?" People who ask this don't really care about the answer. They're just frustrated. These sentences are structured like questions, but they're really emotional outbursts.
A question that appears unanswerable may turn out to be quite easily solved, and any belief or thought patterns structured on the eternal lack of an answer are doomed for failure. This especially bothers me because it teaches children to be dumbfounded by questions instead of being fascinated by finding answers. My favorite: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? For me, the answer to this one is simple. No matter where in the chicken's evolutionary history you draw the distinction between "chicken" and "non-chicken ancestor of the chicken", at some point, a non-chicken, chicken-like creature laid a true chicken egg. It was the egg. It kills the joke, but that sort of thing is what a thirst for understanding often requires. There will always be deeper and deeper questions available to entertain us as they pop up.