Creationists admit "We are losing badly"

[ok doser]

Wait, what? "Creationists admit losing badly"?? No way. How could that be with all of TOL's creationoscienceamoligists pounding away at their keyboards, unleashing their title wave of scientific knowledge on the world, year after year after year.

This story must be a LIEberal hoax. I'm sure Nazaroo or one of the other well-informed experts around here can get to the truth of the matter.

what a weirdo :nono:

 

[ClimateSanity]

what a weirdo :nono:

Can you tell me what a title wave is? Is it the numerous number of threads posted by creationists?

 

[KingdomRose]

Did you cut and paste your whole long post?

No....What difference would that make anyway? You have no reasonable, scholarly reply to contribute? Just barbs to throw?

 

[KingdomRose]

That was Behe's first definition, but it's since changed (at least a couple of times). But then that's largely irrelevant in the bigger scheme of things, since ID creationism is dead.



Sure it is. The same people who came up with ID creationism also wrote The Wedge Strategy, which opens with, "The proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built." It also states "Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions."

So yeah....it's as faith-based as it gets.



Good for them.



You need to keep up with the times. Those have since been shown to have evolved.

ID creationism is dead. The whole point was to get creationist arguments in public school science classes, but the Kitzmiller v. Dover ruling put an end to that. ID creationists aren't even trying to get ID creationism into schools any more.

Let it go and get back to your true cause....Biblical literalism.

I didn't bring the Bible into my post at all. You are stuck on a hatred of all things Biblical. You can't even discuss a scientific theory that might touch on intelligent design.

 

[KingdomRose]

Copy and pasting anything without a citation is useless. It often demonstrates that the person who did it never was highly educated in what they claim to be knowledgable in, as college professors don't accept any information from an uncited source. The reason is that the professors want to check and make sure that the information gathered was from a credible source and not some website that is unreliable.

That's why it's a problem

Hey, Greggie......I noted where the information that I cited may be encountered, if anyone wanted to read about the subject. So your thing is you don't feel like bothering with anyone's post unless he/she is "highly educated"? Why are you analyzing a person here rather than their argument?

 

[KingdomRose]

The evolutionists have won hands-down. That's why they came here, because they love us so much they want to set us crazy Creationists straight. We should be grateful. After all, they could be spending their time doing real science instead of pulling us out of our backwater mythology. When will we see the pale blue light of science and enter the modern age? :bang:

BTW, anyone read Behe's The Edge of Evolution? He's one of those Christians who believes in evolution.

I didn't see that in his book Darwin's Black Box or his contribution to Intelligent Design 101, or the transcript of his being questioned at a trial. He and other scientists believe that irreducible complexity is a scientific observation, and it could not have happened without some kind of intelligence. I will have to check out the book you refer to. I don't believe he changed his mind.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Hey, Greggie......I noted where the information that I cited may be encountered, if anyone wanted to read about the subject. So your thing is you don't feel like bothering with anyone's post unless he/she is "highly educated"? Why are you analyzing a person here rather than their argument?

You don't have to be highly educated. You just need to be familiar with the relevant information. Having a higher education tends to guarantee that, but it's not a must. Unfortunately, on this site there are many who pull information from either uncited or unreliable sources. And it just so happens that much of the incorrect ideas that people here have about science come from these uncited and unreliable sources.

I wasn't commenting on the person or the argument. Just simply pointing out why citing your sources is imperative.

 

[Greg Jennings]

No....What difference would that make anyway? You have no reasonable, scholarly reply to contribute? Just barbs to throw?

See this is what I'm trying to prevent, KR. Because you didn't cite your source, you're opening yourself up to criticism by those who already know the importance of citations from an academic perspective.

 

[gcthomas]

No....What difference would that make anyway? You have no reasonable, scholarly reply to contribute? Just barbs to throw?

Cut n paste suggests you haven't gone to the bother of understanding the argument and summarising it. That may be inaccurate, but it is an easy impression to avoid.

Summarise the best bit suitable for a forum post, then we can discuss it.

 

[Jose Fly]

I didn't bring the Bible into my post at all.

Yeah, that's the whole point of ID creationism...to be able to repeat creationist arguments without having to bring up the Bible or God.

It didn't work.

You are stuck on a hatred of all things Biblical. You can't even discuss a scientific theory that might touch on intelligent design.

There is no scientific theory associated with ID creationism.

 

[Interplanner]

Yeah, that's the whole point of ID creationism...to be able to repeat creationist arguments without having to bring up the Bible or God.

It didn't work.



There is no scientific theory associated with ID creationism.

Of course, there is. that is why there is so much rejection of it. None of the ID Creation people are saying it is fantasy like LORD OF THE RINGS. They are saying it is closer than the Farrellian odds of evolution and mutation. Lyell called his opponent 'physico-theologians' (theologians who said the proof was hidden in plain sight). That is the crux of the problem, not lack of association. The problem is disdain, villification, demonizing, insult, belittling, etc.

 

[gcthomas]

Of course, there is. that is why there is so much rejection of it. None of the ID Creation people are saying it is fantasy like LORD OF THE RINGS. They are saying it is closer than the Farrellian odds of evolution and mutation. Lyell called his opponent 'physico-theologians' (theologians who said the proof was hidden in plain sight). That is the crux of the problem, not lack of association. The problem is disdain, villification, demonizing, insult, belittling, etc.

ID has at its base the concept of irreducible complexity (argument by incredulity) and an unnecessary god doing the work that can be done by nature, given the great age of the earth. Science, which must work on the basis of methodological naturalism, will never great ID as anything more than a joke. Unless it is seen as the big deceit of the Wedge Document.

 

[Jonahdog]

Of course, there is. that is why there is so much rejection of it. None of the ID Creation people are saying it is fantasy like LORD OF THE RINGS. They are saying it is closer than the Farrellian odds of evolution and mutation. Lyell called his opponent 'physico-theologians' (theologians who said the proof was hidden in plain sight). That is the crux of the problem, not lack of association. The problem is disdain, villification, demonizing, insult, belittling, etc.

ID is nothing more than a back door attempt at Christian creationism. Those putting it forth deserve to be insulted. They are either ignorant and professing knowledge or liars.

 

[Stuu]

One of the best cases for homeschooling, which is always under attack. We can innoculate our kids before the atheists get to them

The point of most homeskooling quite clearly is not proper education, but indoctrination of children in their parents' conspiracy theories.

God is weak and satan is strong, right?

But do you have evidence that such a ploy doesn't go the way of Catholic schooling, which as I understand it turns young people to atheism at greater rates than state schools do?

Stuart

 

[Zeke]

Nor did I claim it does. I'm happy with my stance on things. You just look after yours.....

Cheers :cheers:

Careful, you might be drinking out of a designed mug there Hedshaker.

 

[gcthomas]

Careful, you might be drinking out of a designed mug there Hedshaker.

Ah, the old 'humans can design artefacts therefore everything natural was designed by the Christian God' argument.

Don't you see the glaring fault in the logic there?

 

[oatmeal]

One of the few intelligent design blogs left is "Uncommon Descent". Recently, Sal Cordova--an ID creationist--was banned from the blog, which seems kinda odd since he's a fairly well-known creationist and ID apologist. But in banning him, his fellow creationists sent him a letter that explains he was banned for also participating in a non-ID creationist site. That letter states (in part)...



I guess it's progress to see ID creationists finally coming around and recognizing the reality of the situation....ID creationism is dead, long since so. Millennials are accepting the reality of evolution in greater numbers, are leaving Christianity, and are citing the faith's anti-science attitude as among their reasons for leaving.

All good news. :up:

That is one man's opinion.

Since God created the heavens and the earth, you would have to convince God that He did not create the heavens and the earth.

Good luck with that one!

 

[Greg Jennings]

Ah, the old 'humans can design artefacts therefore everything natural was designed by the Christian God' argument.

Don't you see the glaring fault in the logic there?

I've yet to hear anyone explain just why God is purposefully misleading his people on the age of Earth. Why is he putting so much in the ground that suggests that Genesis is not a literal story, if it actually is?

Is God a huge comedian, and misleading the entire world is his greatest joke?

 

[Jose Fly]

That is one man's opinion.

An opinion that's supported by reality.

Since God created the heavens and the earth, you would have to convince God that He did not create the heavens and the earth.

Good luck with that one!

I'll do that as soon as I come across God.

 

[Interplanner]

I've yet to hear anyone explain just why God is purposefully misleading his people on the age of Earth. Why is he putting so much in the ground that suggests that Genesis is not a literal story, if it actually is?

Is God a huge comedian, and misleading the entire world is his greatest joke?

No, the comedy is all the mental gymnastics that have been done to deny that the material as we see has been through huge contortions and disturbances. When tons of material from New England ends up in Grand Canyon, when the whole center of Australia is determined to be rapid deposit sentiment, it is clear that our Maker was breaking open the fountains of the deep on a scale that sunk and raised whole plates at a time, that there was both massive amounts of water and magma sloshing around everywhere. Catastrophic and quick plate tectonics is what Genesis is referring to and is the geologic story as well.