65
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2025
65 points (81.6% liked)
Videos
18304 readers
188 users here now
For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!
Rules
- Videos only (aside from meta posts flagged with [META])
- Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
- Don't be a jerk
- No advertising
- No political videos, post those to !politicalvideos@lemmy.world instead.
- Avoid clickbait titles. (Tip: Use dearrow)
- Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article or tracked sharing link.
- Duplicate posts may be removed
- AI generated content must be tagged with "[AI] …" ^Discussion^
Note: bans may apply to both !videos@lemmy.world and !politicalvideos@lemmy.world
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I think the irreducible complexity debate is over. Creationist scientists will continue to publish "but maybe" arguments because defending creationism is part of their identity, but its just a "but maybe this gap in human knowledge proves XYZ". They are starting with a conclusion and looking for arguments that it isn't impossible.
I agree, I don't think that a lack of current understanding proves the existence of god in any way. But them drawing the wrong conclusion doesn't mean that they aren't right about there being a lack of current understanding.