I wouldn't get excited about debunking them.
To the extent that they're genuine pre-scientific attempts to explain the world, then I have no problem with them: in fact, god hypotheses fit nicely into the history of science, alongside phlogiston.

The antiquity of a false belief doesn't bother me at all. You can have false beliefs for the best possible reason. What's in very poor taste is adhering to them in the face of their inadequacy - but that applies to all beliefs, religious or otherwise.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Thu 19 Mar 2009, 15:48, 1 reply)

Fair enough...
...good enough for the masses until we knew better. But how do you explain Shaun Ryder? Eh? Eh? I said EH?
(thatblokeoverthere not quite as much an arsehole as I thought, Thu 19 Mar 2009, 15:51, closed)