u/Archiver1900

Remember "Answers in Genesis", one of the main young earth creationist organizations which touts that the earth is only 6000 years old, evolution didn't happen, etc.

https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/?srsltid=AfmBOorRraxTsQB5vYrKYcSAFHWPEVhvnN4gVqxdWtj27tpDZB_dmG_m

https://answersingenesis.org/evolution/?srsltid=AfmBOorByriu-z9YGuDmk4H12nGNGrkodNcKA-Zf0MtyE2TzQ82Rxwwf

Turns out I've found a gem that I don't normally see people mention. They admit that their beliefs are meaningless if you don't start off with their preferred conclusion that the Bible(AKA their interpretation) is true in an article titled "Can We Prove God Without the Bible?"

https://answersingenesis.org/is-god-real/can-we-prove-god-without-the-bible/

I encourage you to read the whole thing because they urge their viewers that premise one MUST be that their belief is true and any other premise is evil. I'm not joking.

Here are some excerpts:

>"We use the Bible because it is God’s Word and is our foundation. However, the non-Christian’s foundation is autonomous man’s reasoning (i.e., reasoning based solely on one’s intellect and not God’s Word)"

>"It isn’t so much the evidence for the Bible you do not accept; you don’t accept the fact—as your starting point—that the Bible is true. When you presuppose that the Bible must be “proven,” any sort of evidence you see can be interpreted against the Bible. But Christians, who start with the presupposition that the Bible is true, can explain the evidence—logically, consistently, and correctly."

>"Since you have denounced a belief in God, it is clear you never truly believed His Word nor stood on it as your foundation. This is another example of how when we stop using God’s Word as our foundation and then use man’s autonomous reasoning as a foundation, we crumble, spiritually."

Occasionally it's stupefying that such treasures are found in some of the most obscure places. The only reason why I even knew about this was from a Viced Rhino video(This one in particular https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Zz4ulyvVoI).

I am someone who spends practically every day for almost 2 years researching the YEC vs Evolution "Debate" in my free time, and just today did I learn that AIG admits that their views are all meaningless if you don't start out with them being true.

Almost as grand as their rejection of opposing evidence in their "Statement of faith".

>"No apparent, perceived, or claimed evidence in any field of study, including science, history, and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture obtained by historical-grammatical interpretation. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information"

https://answersingenesis.org/about/faith/?srsltid=AfmBOooeZg377OqR409w7wfroSy2AFX3mQLDvdrXTpPOPDxTA9_k3ESt

For those interested in debunking this claim: just because humans are fallible and do not possess all information does it mean we cannot learn about past or present events using data and evidence. If one is the recipient of a supernatural revelation that claims there are no objects that surpass 3 inches in height, and we observe them. We have disproved the claims of the revealer.

I would like to hear your views about AIG's obscure admission. If there's anything I could have done better, let me know :)

I've stumbled upon questions such as: "Don't you want to become rich?" If one says no, it makes it seem like the person does not want to be wealthy. If they say yes, it implies that they will do what the asker wills. Which is likely a negative.

These types of questions are unlikely to be loaded/complex questions, as they have no unjustifiable presupposition put into them. Such as "Have you stopped cheating on your exams yet?" Which presupposes that the respondent has cheated.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Complex-Question-Fallacy

The only way I know how to deal with these types of questions is by claiming that "This question assumes fallacy X".

I'm sure there is a better way to address it. I would like to know the fallacy so I can call it out when I encounter it in my life, like loaded questions.