Dinosaurs and Man

[Angrboda]

You know, I'm reading Victor Stenger's "God: The Failed Hypothesis," and it's astounding what we can determine about the universe, its origin and so forth on the basis of physics and simple arguments. Given the arguments that can be marshaled against the existence of God, arguing over this one data point seems rather insignificant.

But here's the thing. Even if we accept your data point as proven — instead of a potentially valid data point, that might be as Patton and others claim — even if we accept that the Paluxy man tracks are indeed man tracks, you still have a problem. And let's take it as given that we'll accept this as proof that the theory of evolution is false, you still have a problem. Even if they are man tracks, and they disprove evolution, that doesn't count as evidence of the truth of your God and the bible. Your God and your creation myth isn't the only creation myth. Let's suppose there are a thousand different creation myths out there, and you manage to refute them all, you still have a problem. No matter how many creation myths or scientific explanations you refute, none of your refutations is evidence that your creation story is true, for there are always possible creation stories you haven't refuted, and as long as there is one possible story not refuted, all your millions of refutations provide not a whit of reason for believing yours. Welcome to the fallacy of the misapplication of the law of the excluded middle. Ain't logic a bitch?

Enjoy your (disputed) data point. Would you like a free set of steak knives?