Science Wildcard Fallacy

The Science Wildcard Fallacy occurs when scientific mystery is used as an excuse for errors in logic. This is not to say that there are not things that we don’t know, either by Divine revelation through scientific observation, Divine revelation through Scripture, Divine revelation through dreams and visions, and so forth. God provides many benefits to the human race through science, but sometimes the word is used as a magic word to gain unwarranted credibility for irrational thinking such as the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story and other scams. 

Examples of the Science Wildcard Fallacy

Roxanne: “If, as you say, there is no God, and the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story is fact, then some questions must be answered before you can state this as fact. For instance, where did the matter come from to create the Big Bang? How did consciousness develop from matter? How did the first life form? How did the laws of nature develop? There are many other unanswered questions that should make you very skeptical of your claim.”

Sandra: “Actually, I can remain certain of my claim. Science will eventually find the answers to all these questions. There is no evidence for God.”

Roxanne: “I know Jesus in the same way that you know that the real world exists around you. I know Jesus Christ, not the theology or the theory, but the Person of Jesus. This is how I know He exists. However, your philosophy about the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story is no more than a story. And this story doesn't even answer the important questions of life. Yet, based on this story, you continue to claim that I am not experiencing what I am experiencing. Do you realize how crazy that is?"

Sandra cloaks her assertions in mystery using the science wildcard fallacy along with the magic word, science.

Member of the Audience: "How did consciousness come from matter?"

Bill Nye: "Don’t know. This is a great mystery. . . . The nature of consciousness is a mystery; I challenge the young people here to investigate that very question. And I remind you tax payers and voters that might be watching, if we do not embrace the process of science, I mean in the main stream, we will fall behind economically. This is a point I can’t say enough."

Notice the magic words, "the process of science." Bill appeals to mystery while selling Agnosticism and giving the illusion that this has something to do with science."

Member of the Audience: "Where did the atoms that created the big bang come from?"

Bill Nye: "This is a great mystery! You’ve hit the nail on the head. No. Uh, the, what was before the Big Bang? This is what drives us. This is what we want to know. Let’s keep looking. Let’s keep searching. . . . To us, this is wonderful and charming and compelling. This is what makes us get up and go to work every day is to try to solve the mysteries of the Universe."

Bill sells the defect as a benefit. When a theory is missing the basic information to make it work, it should not be held so dogmatically. It is irrational for Bill to be dogmatic in his opinion that God could not have created the Universe when he doesn't even have a working hypothesis for the Big Bang story. At the same time, there is no scientific observation that conflicts in any way with what the God says through the Bible about Creation and the Flood. Whenever the Ten Commandments are read in Scripture, God again says that He created the Heavens, Earth, seas, and everything in them in six days. And He says that He formed Adam out of the dust of the Earth on day six. He also states that there were about 4,000 years between Adam and Christ. That doesn't mean that it can be dogmatically declared that billions of years didn't happen. It can't be dogmatically declared that God didn't create a planet in the Universe that is populated by Easter Bunnies. It's just that it would be odd to think about such things, since there is no evidence for either one in Scipture or in observable scientific research.