How not to debate an Atheist.

Given the recent debate between Bill Nye the Science Guy (that never gets old :) ) and Ken Ham (the founder of the Creation Museum) I've been doing some thinking. First of all, it's an excellent debate, no matter what side of the argument you are on. Both men are well known experts in their respective fields, and both made some excellent points which should inspire you to thought. I will say though, that Ken asked some very poor questions that are easily refuted. To that end I have decided to come up with a list of 10 arguments to never use when debating an atheist or agnostic person on their belief in God. These are the 10 most common arguments that I found, and are all easily refuted. Please note these are by no means ranked in any particular order, just the order I decided to write them.

1. Carbon Dating is unreliable, so there is no way to prove that the earth is 4 billion years old.

This is partially true. Carbon dating is only accurate up to about 60 thousand years. Beyond that it becomes unreliable. However, there is an accurate method that has been tested and re-tested for years to prove it's accuracy. Radiometric, or radioactive, Dating is a method where they measure the radioactivity of materials that they know are old. It is complex science, but in a nutshell we know how radioactive materials like uranium are. We also know how much radioactivity they lose over time, and so based on how much radiation is present in a sample we can determine how old it is based on how long it would have taken for it to lose that much radioactivity. Debate all you want of the validity of these methods based on biblical accounts and a biblical worldview, but they have been proven to be accurate and that fact cannot be argued against scientifically.

2. Atheism is clearly a religion too.

Atheism is clearly a religion in the same way that not smoking is a habit, or that sleeping is a medical condition. It is true that Atheists are a group of people who have similar worldviews, but that no more makes them a religion than it does to say that cat people and dog people each get their own religion because they have similar feelings about their respective animal.

3. Scientist X or Y believes in God!

While some scientists do believe in God, an overwhelming majority of them don't. In 2009, the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press polled members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science on belief in a higher power. 51% believed that their could be a higher order to things, but when specifically asked about the existence of any sort of God, only 5.5% said they believed in God's existence. That means that if you point to a scientist who believes in God, then you cherry pick one of the few who do, and you will be picked apart because of the 94.5% of scientists that do not believe in God.

4. The United States was founded as a Christian Nation!

While the US is primarily Christian now, we were not founded as a Christian Nation. Here is why.

• The Declaration of Independence does mention God, but because that simply separated us from England it is not a basis for saying that we founded a Christian Nation. 
• The constitution is a secular document written ,among other things, to protect the freedom of ALL religions and beliefs. 
• The Treaty of Tripoli (Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary) was the first treaty concluded between the United States of America and Tripolitania, signed at Tripoli on November 4, 1796. It specifically states the following: 
• As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims],—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Mohammedan] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
• In God we trust didn't appear on coins until 1864, and it didn't appear on paper money until 1957. It also wasn't adopted as the US Motto until 1956.
• Finally, Under God, was added to the pledge of Allegiance in 1954.

So, arguably we are a Christian Nation now, but we were not founded as one. There is other evidence as well, but these are the biggest reasons that Christians base their reasoning on.

5. The human body is too complex to have not been created.

This is an argument that does sound fairly concrete, but it isn't. While humans are the highest order in the food chain, we don't have the most complex bodies. Only the most complex brains. Primates have bodies that are almost the same as ours, and can be trained to do the exact same thing that people can. Cows have more complex digestive systems, and almost every other creature on the planet produces its own vitamin C. We have to ingest ours. Insects have complex detection systems on their antennae that are more sensitive than our eyes, bats and certain fish have sonar vision, and butterflies have more complex eyes that can see more colors than human eyes. While all of these things are amazing, and could be used to craft and argument, simply stating that because we are so complex there must be a God will not win a debate. We aren't as complex as you may believe.

6. But, The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says...

First of all, if you've used this argument, let me ask you a question. What are the other 3 laws of thermodynamics? If you can name them without looking them up, then you probably understand why this argument is invalid. If you can't you don't understand thermodynamics enough to even make this case, and shouldn't argue with it anyway.

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states: that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium—the state of maximum entropy.

Christians often use this argument to say that we could not have evolved, because we would have hit our maximum potential sooner and not became humans, or would have used up all of our energy and ceased to exist. However, as I have highlighted above in Bold Italics, this only applies to an isolated, or closed, system. The earth is not a closed system. It's system extends to space, our solar system, our galaxy, and the universe. Even if the universe has a finite size, which we don't know yet, the amount of energy required to phase us out of existence or to stop all development is unfathomable. Therefore this argument is invalid.

7. If we evolved from monkeys why are there still monkeys?

Assume that some monkey's evolved into humans as part of their evolutionary path. What about the rest of them that did not? They didn't die off, but simply evolved into other types of monkeys. Making this statement is similar to saying, America was Colonized by Europe, so why does Europe still exist? Not all Europeans came to America, so they stayed European. Therefore Europe still exists.

8. Science changes all the time, so it can't be trusted.

There are two parts to this answer. First, this is actually the fact that makes science so trustworthy. Most scientists and all scientific principles are called theories. Even ones which are commonly referred to as laws. This is because people understand that any scientific principle at any point could be dis-proven, refined, or altered to suit a new understanding of something. By making scientific theory this way it means we can trust that they won't pretend to know it all, and will in fact be open to finding new evidence to lead us to truth.

The second part is this. Have you ever gotten medicine for a cold? Have you ever gotten shots, driven a car, used a phone or computer, eaten at a restaurant, used sunscreen, put on make up, flown in a plane, drank a soda, or used a microwave? Of course you have. Maybe not all of them, but the list is truthfully much longer than that. Almost everything that we have or use is based in science. Even the Bible you read was created using a machine that science allowed to be developed. You trust that these items will do what they are supposed to, and therefore you trust science every day.

9. Hitler was an Atheist!

We don't know if Hitler died and Atheist or not. There are good sources on both sides of the argument, and honestly we can't know what he truly believed anyway. We do know however that in Mien Kampf Hitler states that he was raised Catholic and believes that the Aryan Race was created and Destined to be the perfect race. Meaning that at least at one point in his life Hitler was actually a Christian.

10. You just like sinning so much that you don't believe in God.

If you get to this point in a debate then you have badly lost, and are just angry. That statement is paper thin stereotype against all non religious people, that isn't true. While there may be some Atheists where this is the case, it nowhere represents all of them. That would be the same thing as an Atheist saying "You're just a christian because you like sinning and are afraid to face the consequences in the afterlife." It isn't true in most cases, and is very offensive.

Bonus* Personal Experience with God. 

Personal experiences are practically impossible to both prove and disprove. They are powerful tools however for both witnessing and debating. You can't rely on them though to change someones mind or win an argument. Consider this. If someone has had a personal experience where they were abducted by aliens, would you believe them when they told you about it? What if someone is schizophrenic, and have the personal experience of hearing voices or seeing things. Does that make those things real?

You may say those are ridiculous and extreme arguments, but look at it from the perspective of the Atheist. They don't believe in a God, so your experience with God will be placed in the same realm as the alien abduction story. It may even make you seem schizophrenic, because you see, hear, or feel things that, to the Atheist, do not exist. Your personal experiences are yours, and have the most meaning to you. That can be used with those who are willing to believe, or if you are credible in some way (scientist, doctor, ect) but in no way are they able to win someone over on their own. The more you play up your personal experience, the weaker your argument becomes.

Conclustion

To be honest I considered not posting this. I know I will catch flak either from Hardcore Conservatives or young earth creationists, or both. But the point of this post is not to convince a Christian that he/she is wrong (I know that if you don't believe in science or historical fact that I won't convince you of that in this blog post), but rather to teach you how to avoid some simple errors in debating an Atheist or Agnostic person. Odds are they know this stuff, and making arguments that are wrong are easily refuted only makes you and Christians look bad. Above all remember to be respectful to those you debate with. Getting angry, frustrated, or coming off as condescending will cause to lose the debate every time, because you lose the respect and attention of the person you are debating.