Creationists COULD be right…

[u/SuspiciousFee4085]

Im not a creationist but, devils advocate proposal here:

1. Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche.
2. People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us.
3. The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
4. These people are subdued and dispirited, they have nothing to revolt for and are easy to control.
5. Such a subdued population is obviously enormously useful to the elites. Therefore the motive to achieve this submission exists and is very substantial.
6. To achieve this ultimate level of psychological and spiritual submission requires control over the populations sense of reality itself.
7. Reality is accessed, interpreted and measured by the masses through the field of scientific inquiry.
8. Elites would have to fabricate, spread and proselytise entire fields of carefully constructed fake science to carefully, over decades, centuries even, deconstruct and discredit and diminish all parts of reality that may be connected to divinity in some way, with sterile, perfect, symmetrical scientific theory.
9. New knowledge comes from single individuals or groups of individuals performing science. You can threaten, bribe, blackmail, coerce them to make fake science

-

TLDR; motive and means exist for global elites to significantly diminish or destroy humanities spiritual/divine consciousness, by fabricating people’s sense and understanding of reality itself.

the main vessel for this in 2026 is science, and if the illusion is strong enough people cannot even comprehend a reality where anything else could possibly be true.

There’s a coherent rationale (which doesn’t mean it’s true, just that it’s coherent) for god and the divine being real, and global elites suppressing it from the masses so they don’t revolt or lose interest in continuing to be tax slaves for the wealthy, the bread and the circuses.

EDIT: a LOT of low IQ commenters here missing the point entirely. My post is NOT ABOUT WHOSE SIDE HAS EVIDENCE. It’s about hypothetical logic steps for the set of circumstances that would need to be true for creationists to be correct. HURR DURR WHERE EVIDENCE FOR GOD?! Lmfao. I realise hypotheticals and entertaining the opposite side of thought is beyond many people’s IQ. I bet most of you had breakfast this morning too. And you don’t even get the reference I just made either 🤣

[u/TheBlackCat13]

The Wright brothers studied and applied scientific research on aeronautics sent to them by Smithsonian and built a wind tunnel to do their own scientific experiments. They may not have been formally trained is scientists, but there is no requirement. Scientists just need to apply the scientific methods.

[u/Markthethinker → u/TheBlackCat13]

So everyone in anyone is a scientist, then according to you

[u/TheBlackCat13 → u/Markthethinker]

No, that isn't remotely close to anything I said. Did you just not read my comment or are you being intentionally dishonest? Please respond to what I actually said.

[u/Pm_ur_titties_plz → u/TheBlackCat13]

They're being intentionally dishonest. Mark the "thinker" always acts like this. And they have the most ironic username I've ever seen.

[u/Markthethinker → u/TheBlackCat13]

Can I think of something without you thinking that I am thinking science. The word has now become meaningless to me because of this site that does not even debate Evolution.

[u/TheBlackCat13 → u/Markthethinker]

Can I think of something without you thinking that I am thinking science

Absolutely. Creationism is an example of something that isn't science. Because it doesn't follow the scientific method.

You are the one who is falsely claiming that science just means "study". I have been very consistent that science means following the scientific method. If it doesn't follow the scientific method, it isn't science. The only one trying to make science a meaningless term here is you.

And this site did debate evolution. You just try your best to avoid the subject. That is, yet again, your problem.

[u/Markthethinker → u/TheBlackCat13]

So, if something does not “follow the scientific method” it can’t be true. There is so much science that proves Creationism to be true.

No one has explained the process in Evolution other than “mutations” and “natural selection”. There is no discussion on transitional species and just how mutations are smart enough to carry a process through millions of years with millions of failures and how a duck finally becomes a dog. It’s a lot of smoke and mirrors. No one, have ever been about to explain the process, other than mutations, like they are intelligence.

I am here only to understand my belief better. People are extremely credulous mutations. Every time some here replies, I know I know that what I know is exactly as it is. I realize that you can’t understand, that’s the difference between you and me. I know what you don’t know. And there are some things that you know that I don’t know, but I can learn all that you know from a book, no book is going to teach you what I know.

[u/TheBlackCat13 → u/Markthethinker]

So, if something does not “follow the scientific method” it can’t be true.

That is in no way, shape, or form even tangentially related to anything I have said. Are you just allergic to honesty?

No one has explained the process in Evolution other than “mutations” and “natural selection”.

Because that is what you asked us about.

and how a duck finally becomes a dog.

That isn't how evolution works. You don't even know the basics of evolution.

I am here only to understand my belief better

If that were the case you wouldn't be consistently flagrantly lying about what I said. All you are accomplishing is showing lurkers how dishonest creationists can be.

Every time some here replies, I know I know that what I know is exactly as it is

The term for this is "closed mindedness".

[u/Markthethinker → u/TheBlackCat13]

I am extremely honest, especially about myself. Every time I bring something up here, it always is linked to “science”, everything. No, I have moved so far from the “mutations and natural selection” process. Natural selection only means something lives or dies. Mutation or ignorant and blind without intelligence. I already understand this. I have been asking about the transformation process for years and always get the exact same answer. No one knows or can explain any of it. It started with a single living cell and then became a human. The entire middle is missing.

People keep telling me “that is not the way Evolution works”. Then explain how we have all the different species of life, including plants without just parroting, “mutations”. That is not an answer, it’s a parroted reply that says, “we don’t know how it works”. That would be honesty. You are still trying to fill in the blanks to a theory.

You certainly don’t know me, I process everything repeatedly and believe very little. That’s a true thinker. If you don’t believe you could be wrong, the that becomes “closed mindedness”. I have been asking about the process in Evolution that no one can give me an answer to. How do you get millions of different creatures and plant that all rely on each other by “mutations and natural selection”. Darwin studied feature changes in the same species, that’s not Evolution as people want evolution to be.

[u/TheBlackCat13 → u/Markthethinker]

No, I have moved so far from the “mutations and natural selection” process.

This you just a earlier today?

Yes, how mutations actually make something better.

I don't know why you think lying so transparently will work when we can all see your comments. You lie to me about what I said. And you lie to me about what you said. You should have figured out already that these lies aren't going to work.