Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam

“Secondly, Another way that men ordinarily use to drive others and force them to submit to their judgments, and receive their opinion in debate, is to require the adversary to admit what they allege as a proof, or to assign a better. And this I call argumentum ad ignorantiam.” — John Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689)

I love it when creationists use Arguments from Ignorance, like  “I can’t believe evolution. It had to be god.” or “The Earth can’t be more than 10,000 years old.” They ignore the preponderance of scientific data, stretching from biology to astronomy, physics to geology to chemistry.

They refuse to learn science, or anything else for that matter, because that would challenge their world-view. They are so anti-science that, even when confronted with their ignorance, they never learn. And they won’t.

And I think that’s great.

Not because they are ignorant or that they cling to their ignorance, but because they keep using the same arguments, without fail, that have no evidence to back them up. And they are forced, more and more, to lie, not only to their audience, but to themselves. And no-one can lie forever. Eventually, the truth comes out. Eventually, someone says “Bullshit. I don’t believe you.”

“Science is what we do to keep us from lying to ourselves.” — Richard Feynman

Creationists keep using the same arguments. And the single best Argument from Ignorance they have is “A guy rose from the dead 2000 years ago.”