• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Creationism vs. Flat Earth: Which belief is more irrational?

Or Armageddon...

Not nearly such a scary story. That future (final?) battle involves others, takes place in the ME (as much of biblical history and prophesy does) and the winner is already known.
 
Many creationists are also Flat Earthers.

The New Testament states that the Earth is flat (in a roundabout way):

Matthew 4 : 8,9 KJV

Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

The only way it could be possible for Jesus to see "all the kingdoms of the world" is if the Earth was/is flat.
We can do it now and we are not God. So if their is a God who had the power to create the universe and what lies beyond seeing all the kingdoms would be a simple task. Considering the age of the universe there could be life that has evolved billions of years with the capability of seeding this planet with life and the rest of the universe with life. The fact is we are learning a lot every year and in another 100,000 or a million years we will most likely figure out that we do not know it all.
 
We have to pick between creationism vs. flat earth as one being more irrational than the other?

That is like asking which is worse, setting your left foot or right foot on fire?
 
Easy.



Flat Earth. It's absurdly easy to demonstrate false.

With creationism, you have more trouble resulting from the simple fact that given how Earth and life on it works, we're always going to be missing all but a tiny sliver of the record. Plus, evolution requires a person to have the capacity to think about how probability applied over time works. Without that, one could not grasp that all evolution says is that we can expect that on average, the traits most likely to lead to survival in a given situation will appear in those creatures who live in those situations.

It's important to put that way. I regularly see people talk about evolution as if it's something to do with life finding a way. Evolution is the biggest trial and error experiment to exist (unless the multiverse as we theorize it is someone else's experiment; turtles all the way down, that kind of rabbit hole).
Both are beliefs based in appearance. You look around you, and the world looks flat. You look at complex life and it looks designed. They are both equally absurd beliefs.
 
We can do it now and we are not God. So if their is a God who had the power to create the universe and what lies beyond seeing all the kingdoms would be a simple task. Considering the age of the universe there could be life that has evolved billions of years with the capability of seeding this planet with life and the rest of the universe with life. The fact is we are learning a lot every year and in another 100,000 or a million years we will most likely figure out that we do not know it all.

Heresy! And poor spelling. ;)
 
We have to pick between creationism vs. flat earth as one being more irrational than the other?

That is like asking which is worse, setting your left foot or right foot on fire?
Maybe creationism is the left foot and flat earth is the rights foot, while walking barefoot over hot coals. Either way, you end up burned.
 
Heresy! And poor spelling. ;)
I spelled their right. I just failed to use the correct word in the sentence. That is the problem with not being a God or a know-it-all. I love how people actually believe we have all the answers. I remember when I was around 8 or 9 and my great uncle a carpenter gave me an old steel square and showed me how to us it to square off the end of a board. I had that square all figured out. Then when I was 14 he started to explain to me how to cut rafters for a roof with it. I had that square for 6 years and never realized what those numbers on it were for. Now after using that square for 50+ years I realize I don't have a clue what all you can do with that simple tool.
 
I spelled their right. I just failed to use the correct word in the sentence. That is the problem with not being a God or a know-it-all. I love how people actually believe we have all the answers. I remember when I was around 8 or 9 and my great uncle a carpenter gave me an old steel square and showed me how to us it to square off the end of a board. I had that square all figured out. Then when I was 14 he started to explain to me how to cut rafters for a roof with it. I had that square for 6 years and never realized what those numbers on it were for. Now after using that square for 50+ years I realize I don't have a clue what all you can do with that simple tool.

Yep, many folks don’t know how to use a speed square or a level. Which is fine and allows me to make money using that knowledge.
 
And going for second servings on the Kool aid too.
They simply demand that nonsense must be respected because it's religious nonsense.
 
Isaiah was divinely inspired and was no less ignorant than anyone living today. He was dealing with the language of his day.
So when Prekash, a modern day Hindu living in New Delhi claims to have been “divinely inspired” by Vishnu, your response would be?
 




I am a Creationist, I will say solidly in the Michael Behe camp. Meaning I am much more solidly into Intelligent Design.
 
.


Is it the suppostion that Flat Earth as a scientific hypothesis is False for all time?
 
Easy.



Flat Earth. It's absurdly easy to demonstrate false.

With creationism, you have more trouble resulting from the simple fact that given how Earth and life on it works, we're always going to be missing all but a tiny sliver of the record. Plus, evolution requires a person to have the capacity to think about how probability applied over time works. Without that, one could not grasp that all evolution says is that we can expect that on average, the traits most likely to lead to survival in a given situation will appear in those creatures who live in those situations.

It's important to put that way. I regularly see people talk about evolution as if it's something to do with life finding a way. Evolution is the biggest trial and error experiment to exist (unless the multiverse as we theorize it is someone else's experiment; turtles all the way down, that kind of rabbit hole).
This.

Flat Earth is clearly more irrational, at least in terms of obvious evidence against it.
 
I am a Creationist, I will say solidly in the Michael Behe camp. Meaning I am much more solidly into Intelligent Design.
ID is just repackaged creationism and equally BS without any supporting evidence. Nor to mention directly contradicted by evolution.
 
"If your personal beliefs deny what is objectively true about the world, then they're more accurately called personal delusions." ---Neil deGrasse Tyson

Creationism and flat Earth beliefs are both irrational beliefs, usually based on nothing more than dogma, willful ignorance, or emotional dependency. Both beliefs fly in the face of scientific knowledge and understanding, and require a suspension of rational and critical thinking, not to mention quite a cognitive dissonance. As absurd as they are, which is the more irrational belief? Let's compare them in three categories and determine a "winner."

Round 1: core tenets.

Creationism is basically the belief that God created everything as is; the universe, Earth, and humans (and other species) as we are. It generally ignores sound scientific principles like evolution and adheres to an often literal interpretation of the bible. Typically, Young Earth Creationists (YEC) believe the Earth is roughly less than 10,000 years old while Old Earth Creationists (OEC) allow for an Earth to be in the millions or even billions of years old (God still created everything in OEC, but he just let things run on automatic for awhile). Creationism has been historically, and continues to be, a popular belief.

The Flat Earth belief posits that the Earth itself is not rounded like a sphere, but is actually flat (although it can also be a flat disk to give the appearance of roundness). Flat earth adherents reject any claims of a spherical Earth and shrug off any proof to the contrary as false, misleading, and even as conspiracies meant to fool people. They may even refer to the bible to reason that the earth is flat. However, while followers of either belief might strongly adhere to their belief, there is a segment of creationists (the OEC) who allow for some injection of established scientific principles with regard to the age of the earth or evolution (although God is still the root cause of everything). Therefore, Flat Earth narrowly edges out over creationism. Winner Round 1: Flat Earth.

Round 2: Adherents/popularity

While the idea of a flat earth dates back many centuries, the ancient Greeks (among other societies) developed the concept of a spherical earth. Believers of a flat earth would continue until even modern times. Today, there is even a Flat Earth Society. However, until modern times with social media, the idea of a flat earth never gained too much traction. Sure there may have been surges in the popularity or belief of a flat earth, but it always seemed more of an afterthought. Social media has been a tool for flat earthers to expose themselves and try to convince others of their views or make the idea of a flat earth more mainstream, especially among millennials. But they always seem more willing to "hide in the shadows" as it were. The current iteration of the Flat Earth Society has approximately 500 members, although there are likely more people who are flat earthers.

Creationism, on the other hand, has likely far more numbers of adherents. A gallup poll several years ago indicated that 4 in 10 Americans (not counting other countries) subscribe to a creationist belief. That's roughly 125 million Americans. That's also a very sad commentary on our society too. Creationists win this round by sheer numbers alone. Winner round 2: Creationists.
---Continued---
A pure atheist POV is the most irrational belief of all, I think it should be on the list, but out of the options...It's clearly flat earth.
 
then flat earth is opposite since it has evidence......................no evidence Creationism is wrong (if I may sound like a Trumper....)
What is the "evidence" for a flat earth? There's no evidence creationism is correct, as it doesn't have any at all.
 
A pure atheist POV is the most irrational belief of all, I think it should be on the list, but out of the options...It's clearly flat earth.
Your argument is flawed, as atheism is not a belief.
 
.


Is it the suppostion that Flat Earth as a scientific hypothesis is False for all time?
Yes, it is false, as obvious scientific evidence and observation disproves it.
 
They simply demand that nonsense must be respected because it's religious nonsense.
I guess they're going to be disappointed then, as such claims or beliefs sans evidence is, and should be, generally dismissed and/or ignored.
 
Back
Top Bottom