A Refutation to: God is Not a Good Theory Video

  
     First, it isn't hard to refute arguments that blatantly violate the basic principles of cogent reasoning. Of course, it is easy to throw up a smokescreen of illogical reasons that SEEK and appear to support an assertion. True, those who are not familiar with cogent reasoning will swallow such defective arguments hook line and sinker. But such popular acceptance adds absolutely nothing to the believability or intrinsic validity of the propositions. They only demonstrate the gullibility of the uninformed.


     The existence of a creator isn't a matter of looking at it from a theological or non theological viewpoint as he prefers to describe it. It is a matter of what the evidence indicates or doesn't indicate from a neutral standpoint. Does it strongly indicate a designer? If it does, then there is absolutely nothing theological about it. It is merely indicating a FACT. So restricting it to the theological or non theological is totally irrelevant.

     Also, the ease of imagining things as coming into existence is put forth as evidence that such things are viable. Yet,  it proves nothing except that the human imagination is capable of coming up with many convoluted ideas supported by hypothetical reasons which seem reasonable on the surface, but which if placed under intense scrutiny, prove to be totally implausible.

     Furthermore, such a view demands that we ignore what we otherwise would automatically acknowledge. That codes do not code themselves, but demand a mind, a coder. In short, it demands that we suddenly become mindlessly illogical. Now, being logical and following things to their logical conclusion, is the basis for the scientific method. If we discard logical or coherent reasoning, as is suggested in this video, then we are no longer practicing science.

    Also, Evolution does not prove or provide any evidence of abiogenesis as the video claims. In fact, abiogenesis is a phenomenon that cannot be forced to happen in a lab, nor has ever been directly observed in nature. It is merely an assumption believed to be a fact simply because the alternative, a creator, is deemed unacceptable.