In reality, creationism is an attack on science. If creationists wanted to prove that God created everything, they’d have to first disprove much of our knowledge about biology, geology or paleontology. Needless to say, they haven’t had any success with this.
If Earth is not 4.6 billion years old, but rather 10,000 years old (as most creationists believe), then all theories about geological eras must be wrong, and dinosaurs couldn’t have existed 100 million years ago. It is simply impossible to argue this given the physical evidence.
The opposite is true: a wealth of scientific evidence speaks against creationism. The fossil record clearly illustrates the evolution of living beings. Most scientists also agree on the big bang theory, and the age of Earth can be calculated almost exactly.
With so much evidence piled against them, creationists have the burden of proving their theory right. Naturally, they can’t, so they focus instead on proving existing theories wrong. They fail at this, too.
For instance, creationists claim that we haven’t found any fossils that show the transition between an ancient and a modern creature, which is untrue. They also try to show mathematically that our current population is descended from just Adam and Eve, thus “proving” the Earth must be under 10,000 years old. But mankind hasn’t been steadily increasing in number each year at the rate they claim – population growth is more erratic.
Ultimately, creationists fail both at proving their own theory, and disproving the theory of evolution. Clearly, creationism has nothing to do with scientific method or scientific research. In fact, it’s a complete rejection of the laws and conduct of science.
Holocaust deniers pretend to be sincerely interested in history, but they actually ignore historical records.
Holocaust deniers acknowledge there was anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, but insist that there was no planned extermination of Jews in Europe during World War II. They’re emphatic: they just want to know “the truth.”
According to them, Hitler’s final solution for the Jews was actually deportation out of the Reich, not extermination. They believe the main causes of death at the time were disease and starvation. Moreover, they assert that between 300,000 and two million Jews died, rather than five or six million as most historians believe.
In this way, Holocaust deniers can pretend to be open to historical fact, because they do accept some things. But how do they argue their case in the face of overwhelming proof?
Holocaust deniers know that there must be some inaccuracies in that mountain of evidence, so they concentrate on their opponent’s few weak points, and if they find an incorrect statement they’ll conclude that all their opponent’s facts must be wrong.
A commonly used example is the story that Nazis manufactured soap from Jewish corpses, which is a myth. Holocaust deniers argue that if the soap story is historically wrong, the gas chambers must be a myth as well.
But there is a tremendous amount of evidence for the Holocaust, including official records, photographs and millions of testimonies. It’s very clear to scientists and historians that the Holocaust happened, whether or not the Nazis made that soap. It is absurd to discount the entire Holocaust because one false story has arisen.
Final summary
The key message in this book:
Pseudoscience isn’t comparable with real science. It isn’t based on facts, but rather on superstitious belief or manipulation. Yet many people still believe in pseudoscientific or supernatural theories, some of which can be harmful, such as creationism or Holocaust denial. We need to stand up against pseudoscience by using rational, scientific arguments against them.
Actionable advice:
Don’t go to a psychic.
They don’t have magical powers – they’re just good at reading people’s body language and making educated guesses about their personal lives. They might’ve even researched you in advance, which is especially easy if you post information about yourself online. An accurate reading doesn’t mean they have psychic powers, it only means they’re good at faking them.
Suggested further reading: Going Clear by Lawrence Wright
Going Clear offers a rare glimpse into the secret history and beliefs of Scientology as well as the conflicted biography of its founder L. Ron Hubbard. It also details some of the Church’s darker qualities: a tooth and nail method of managing criticism and systematic approach to celebrity recruitment.