I call this the Blue Cheese argument. You make some silly ASSUMPTION from OPINION, like "If the Moon is made of blue cheese", then draw a sillier conclusion "then Chef Boy'RD must have made it".
If I send you to thousands of websites that claim the moon is made of blue cheese, that does not mean that the moon is made of blue cheese. "Everyone believes it" is a fallacy. It only takes one eyewitness observer that has been to the moon to refute the silly notion called a "claim" or "evidence" of blue cheese on the moon. And any evidence or model or theory of a moon made of blue cheese would be silly at that point. Empty "claims" and opinions are meaningless, without merit, and counterproductive. If these empty claims are reported as "fact" or "evidence" and the truth, then that would be a bald-faced outright lie.
Even if you find a great number of scientists that have measured the refraction rate of blue cheese and peer-reviewed this claim, does not make blue cheese. What were their assumptions? All scientists make assumptions. Every theory and model has assumptions. But the layman pays no attention at all to assumptions, the details of truth, and take the "claim" on it's face without assumptions. All you have to do to hide truth is not mention the assumptions, do not point them out, because you would have a lot of explaining to do, and then the truth would come out, how and why dirt could be made into blue cheese. Circular reasoning helps slow down the discovery of truth, voluminous data of "opinion" supporting the false claim from media and colleges and "scientists" all over the world will slow the discovery of truth if their assumptions are wrong. More opinion doesn't make blue cheese. This is the lie of evolution.
Genesis reveals an historical record of an eyewitness account as evidence of creation. What is your evidence otherwise? Or what is your alternative explanation? Abiogenesis? Where do you NOT fail? There is no valid sustaining evidence for myths and magic like evolution and billions of years, or you would present it. You’re still playing children’s pretend games.
Now that you have graduated from juvenile delinquency and try logic, you don't make any sense.
It amazes me.. to hear an atheist in all seriousness saying -- the universe with no cause just magically poofed into existence... Life with no cause just magically poofed into existence, an omeba magically with no cause just poofed into a multi-celluar organism. It makes no difference whether these poofs and changes happened in one day or one year or one million years. They are still unexplained.
Such things did not happen once or twice but millions upon millions of times only to suddenly (and quite conveniently I might add) stop as soon as recorded history began. The common sense of a child can figure this one out. What's your excuse? Go away until you aren't adolescent and are rational
No valid scientific claim can violate a Natural Law.. the Natural Laws regarding information assert. 1. Information is immaterial. 2. The material cannot produce something immaterial... So Materialism, Darwinism, Abiogenesis and even the Big Bang violate this Natural Law and so can be dismissed as false.
Anybody who objects need only provide an example of something material producing something immaterial.
It does not matter how big their alleged mountain of evidence proponents of these notions point to. Because if it violates a Natural Law it is false.. PERIOD.
The material cannot produce the material, known fact. Speculating "that there are many natural ways to produce life" is an error from unfounded OPINION, matter cannot cause itself, nor can matter produce the immaterial,
Yet the media spreads this misinformation as "has been done" or "about to be done", or "almost done." Show me someone outside of science that believes abiogenesis isn't real or at least probable (not possible, too easy). Your propaganda machine for evolution is very successful in this regard.
Despite the spectacular failure of ALL experiments to demonstrate abiogenesis, they have spread this unproven doctrine far and wide. Even if we do figure out how to create life, we already know empirically (observed) that it cannot occur naturally; proven.
The point here is that if life CANNOT occur naturally, then evolution has no beginning, and there is no cure for the myth/lie of evolution from unfounded OPINION. Evolution has no evidence that can sustain it, and will be gone in 10 years, in my time.
Evolutionists believe that life (at least once) spontaneously formed from nonliving chemicals. But this is inconsistent with the natural law of biogenesis. Real science confirms the Bible.
If and when scientists actually do produce life from non-life in the lab the only thing they will have succeeded in doing is demonstrating life as a product of intelligent design... Which is exactly what the theists have been saying all along!
Whether or not scientists finally discover how to produce life from non-life is irrelevant to evolution because it cannot occur NATURALLY. But science and the media and you PRETEND it does matter, or the fact that we're even close is "proof" of evolution.
It's in these small matters that evolution is a lie from it's core, every time you peel back another layer reveals another lie.
The laws that govern the universe preclude it from not having a beginning, and no matter how how you slice it, you cannot escape an external cause for the Physical Universe.
Notice that atheists try to invoke the laws of nature yet are oblivious to the fact that the laws of nature originated with the natural world and do not necessarily apply to anything outside the natural world let alone the one who created the natural world.
Here is a natural law atheists conveniently ignore - an effect cannot be qualitatively or quantitatively greater than it's cause... Yet there is nothing that precludes the cause from being greater than any effect it may produce - in fact the cause necessarily MUST be equal to or greater than any effect it may produce. So based on the very laws of nature they invoke, the concept of a God that is not bound to those laws operating outside of the natural world is supported. As a result they are defeated by their own argument!
Their very approach validates the scriptures - ever increasing in knowledge but never able to come to an understanding of the truth.. Seeking to become wise they became fools. The fool has said in his heart there is no God.