Evolutionists often compare creationists to flat-earthers, as a way of being insulting. Now, admittedly, if there is a modern group that deserves to be used as an insult, it would be flat-earthers. The goal of this article is to do a three-way comparison in 10 different areas of creationists (young-earth creationists), evolutionists, and flat-earthers. The goal is to see how they really compare.
Disagrees with the scientific establishment's position on their topic.
One similarity that creationists do indeed have with flat-earthers is that both positions disagree with the scientific establishment in one or more areas. For evolutionists, this is not a problem because they hold to the establishment position. This is not in and of itself a problem, because any position on any topic that would eventually overthrow the status quo would start out disagreeing with the establishment view.
Requires a conspiracy to work.
First of all, let's start out by defining a conspiracy. In this situation, a conspiracy would be a group of people who know the truth about some aspects of the world and are deliberately trying to cover it up for a reason. Of these three positions, only flat-earthers require a conspiracy for them to be correct. The reason for this is that they need a massive conspiracy, faking all of the images from space.
For creationists, while a conspiracy would help explain some things, no conspiracy is actually needed because such things can be easily explained by a combination of factors, such as evolutionists having a strong dedication to what they truly believe is true. Concerning evolutionists, no conspiracy is needed, but one would help support their side.
Verbally attacks dissenters.
Both evolutionists and flat-earthers tend to verbally attack those who disagree with them. Creationists, on the other hand, more often than not, do not use verbal attacks. Evolutionists tend to insult your intelligence and your education; they will also use foul language. Flat Earthers, on the other hand, will tend to claim that you are either brainwashed or part of the conspiracy. This can also include foul language.
It is working with the Present.
One big distinction that flat-earthers have is that their position deals with questioning the present shape of the Earth. Creationists and evolutionists, on the other hand, tend to disagree mainly on issues about the past, as opposed to present conditions that can be directly measured.
Has people with actual scientific degrees.
Among both creationists and evolutionists, there are people with degrees in actual fields of science. To the best of my knowledge, there are no flat-earthers with degrees in anything, not even underwater basket weaving.
Tend to rely on just so stories.
Just so stories are stories invented as explanations to explain a problem that cannot be dealt with by testable observations. This can be necessary when dealing with the past, simply because we cannot observe the past, and do not have records of everything that happened in the past.
All three use just so stories from time to time. Creationists do not try to claim such explanations as fact. Evolutionists and flat-earthers, on the other hand, often treat such explanations as fact.
Proponents are highly dedicated to their position.
One thing that proponents of all three positions have in common is a strong dedication to their position. Regardless of the forum, any discussions on these topics show a lot of passion and dedication by proponents of each position.
Proponents summarily reject any reasons why their ideas don't work.
One thing that both evolutionists and flat-earthers have in common is that they both summarily reject any reason given as to why their ideas do not work. In some cases, they will even claim to debunk them with a just-so story, then ignore refutations of the so-called debunking.
Creationists do not summarily reject such a claim but will often seek answers to it. This process has led to some interesting and even scientifically testable responses. More often than not, claims made against creationist concepts usually make naturalistic assumptions while assuming the establishment model is correct. They are also often based on misunderstandings or misrepresentations of what the Biblical account actually says, along with actual creationist positions on the topic.
Proponents summarily reject evidence against their position.
Both evolutionists and flat-earthers summarily reject evidence against their position. Evolutionists have a history of summarily rejecting any evidence not from their own peer-reviewed journals. Even if it is, they have attacked both authors and publishers with a burn-the-heretics mentality.
Flat Earthers, on the other hand, summarily dismiss any evidence that the Earth is spherical, such as pictures from space, as a result of the conspiracy required for their ideas to work.
While often accused of doing so by evolutionists, creationists do not reject any actual evidence. Sometimes it has been questioned, but that is a far cry from summarily rejecting evidence; it is also good science to do so. Most of the alleged cases of creationists rejecting evidence are actually cases of simply disagreeing with how it is being interpreted. Once again, there is a big difference between the charge and the reality. In this case, what evolutionists are doing is confusing the evidence with how it is being interpreted.
Proponents are all serious about their position.
Both creationists and evolutionists are completely serious about their positions. I do not know of anyone who holds either of these positions who is not completely serious about them. Most, if not all, Flat-Earthers that you may encounter online are most likely nothing but trolls trying to get attention. This may include trying to get views on a YouTube channel.
Conclusion
Even though evolutionists have often tried to compare creationists to Flat-Earthers, it turns out that when an actual comparison is made, they have more in common with flat earthers than creationists do. In the long run, the use of the term Flat-Earther as a derogatory term is just as pointless as the many other derogatory terms that evolutionists like to use. Ultimately, the use of derogatory terms, no matter how justified, adds nothing to a discussion other than a logical fallacy.
