Fun:101 evidences for a young age of the Earth and the universe

101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe is a steaming heap of arguments for young Earth creationism (YEC) with a grammatical disaster for a title, written by Donald Duck Don Batten, Doctor of Mungbeans, in June 2009 for Creation Ministries International (CMI). The original article can be found here. The text below is the version of 26th March, 2012. They twiddle it every now and then.

The text is a tour de farce of abuse of the uncertainty tactic in science dealing with the past designed to shore up the creaking epistemology of creationism. The author is a documentable idiot in every field he names, including Biblical scholarship, and has the joined-up thinking skills of a creationist. So it's an illustrated (in crayon) catalogue of logical stupidities, internal contradictions and arguments against a young Earth, plus circular reasoning as most of the links are to articles of the same site, and those from far more serious sources are as usual misinterpreted. Well done.

The list claims to have 101 points, because impressive numbers are impressive. So it repeats itself to get the numbers up, has several duplicates, and one item is even a copy of the preceding one. Yeah, it's a Gish Gallop, and a circlejerk as well: almost every reference link in the original article goes to creationist sources, usually on the same damn site.

But guess what? Gish Gallops are A BIT EASY TO REFUTE IN WRITING.

If you tried editing the polite version of this article and started punching the wall in frustration after a while, this is the place to say what you actually think.

80
.

Removed arguments
These arguments turned out to be too stupid even for them. Sadly, burying the evidence is harder with the Internet Archive around.

Analysis
Many arguments on the list go like this:


 * If the Earth is 6,000 years old, we expect X to be less than 6,000 years old.
 * Under some circumstances, X can form in less than 6,000 years.
 * Therefore, the Earth could be 6,000 years old. You can't prove it isn't true! So it totally is! Yeah! Check mate, &ldquo;science&rdquo;.

And a ton of assuming a false dilemma between science and YEC: either science can explain everything, or YEC is true. And ... a pile of example which are arguments against YEC. Again, well done.

There's also the classic syllogism:
 * 1) Science relies on first-hand evidence.
 * 2) Only God has first-hand evidence of creation.
 * 3) Therefore the head of every evolutionist has just exploded.

Below is a breakdown of problems in the author's arguments. It does not exhaustively list all errors, this article would be even bloody longer.

Fallacies

 * Absurd uniformitarian assumption:, , , , , , , , , , , ,
 * If the sky is blue, then all blue things must be the sky:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 * My massive intellect can't think of a way to do that, so it must be impossible:, , , ,
 * Denial:, , , ,
 * Either you're with me, or you're a communist:, , , , , ,
 * Miracles are totally a scientific argument:, ,
 * If two and two, therefore Tuesday:, ,
 * Pseudoscience and dubious science:, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 * Quote mining:, , , , , , ,
 * But my case is special: ,
 * Refuting my made-up version of science:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Technical problems

 * Oops, I contradicted myself: and,  and ,  and ,  and ,  and
 * Let me just say that again with slightly shuffled words:, , , , , , ,
 * Arguments against a young Earth:, , , , , , , ,
 * Mind-numbing stupidity that will make you want to set fire to the Internet: -