
@OpenBiolabsGuy
1 year ago (edited)
S1 Jonathan Sims wouldn’t have provided commentary while he was reading the statement. That’s not his style. He’d have read the statement in character, then after the statement was over he would have provided skeptical commentary. 

Like, “So, basically we have an account here that claims that the sun is unnecessary for the day/night phenomenon to happen on Earth with no explanation other than a sky wizard spoke an incantation and moved his spirit, that earth’s atmosphere was created by separating the waters of earth from the waters of outer space (never mind that outer space is a vacuum and not filled with water), and that all plant and animal species magically popped into existence as they are right now at a time when all the water in the world is apparently “gathered into one place” and is salty sea water. The author didn’t even think to explain how freshwater plants and animals are supposed to survive more than a few minutes when created to survive only in fresh water but in an environment where there’s only salt water. Look, this whole thing is preposterous and contradicts all basic observations of the natural universe around us. George Orwell could probably do a better job of explaining why people continue to believe this despite living in a world of evidence that proves it false better than any apologist. Needless to say that the credibility of this account is highly dubious and I wouldn’t give it any credit. No follow up needed as extensive research has been done by the various scientific communities around the world into the origin of the earth, life on it, and our place in the cosmos and all of it flatly contradicts this account. 

Statement ends.” 