Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why we should not expect many if any Creationists
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 76 of 107 (782784)
04-28-2016 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by jar
04-28-2016 9:09 PM


Re: Learn to read Dawn
True
We discovered it
We are not it
To call a person a creationist is tantamount
To saying they invented it
Which further proves its a discoverable principle
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by jar, posted 04-28-2016 9:09 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by jar, posted 04-28-2016 10:14 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 77 of 107 (782786)
04-28-2016 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Dawn Bertot
04-28-2016 9:16 PM


Re: Learn to read Dawn
Well, no, it is not. It simply shows that Creationists claim a particular scenario.
But it is pretty clear that any descriptions of creation found in the Bible are simply creations of the imagination and not science.
But the fact remains, we see fewer and fewer Creationists and that is as expected.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 9:16 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 10:32 PM jar has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 78 of 107 (782787)
04-28-2016 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by jar
04-28-2016 10:14 PM


Re: Learn to read Dawn
Really
So as an evolutionist if you are
Did you invent it or discover it
Before you declare that creation in the Bible or otherwise
are from the imagination, You first need to demonstrate that
is not a rational viable conclusion from the universe itself
Everything suggests it could be
You would then need to demonstrate that that observable principle
Is not deduced scientifically
I make these points to demonstrate that creation or design has nothing fundamentally with the bible it was around long before the written work
Creation can be nothing but science
Then you can start on the Bible
Dawn
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by jar, posted 04-28-2016 10:14 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:16 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 79 of 107 (782811)
04-29-2016 7:51 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Dawn Bertot
04-28-2016 7:34 PM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
Hi Dawn Bertot,
Summarizing your statements,
  • Evolutionists are arrogant and pompous.
  • Evolutionists do not follow the evidence where it leads.
  • The scientific method ignores reason and science.
  • "Creation and design are not religious or Biblical issues," but we can't reject the "Biblical explanation of creation" because we weren't there, and the Bible tells us how the science of origins works.
Were these imprudent and contradictory assertions meant to address the topic? Are you trying to tell us why creationists are visiting EvC Forum in much fewer numbers now? If not then you should be, because that's what this thread is about.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 7:34 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 8:29 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 80 of 107 (782812)
04-29-2016 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Dawn Bertot
04-28-2016 7:44 PM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
Dawn, I think you're in the wrong thread.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 7:44 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 81 of 107 (782813)
04-29-2016 8:04 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Dawn Bertot
04-28-2016 8:27 PM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
Four replies to one message? Well, at least this one addresses the topic:
Dawn Bertot writes:
The usual tactic of the evolutionist or skeptic is to get the creationist or design exponent tied up in some specific biological detail, unwaringly causing them to ignore any of the basics of the actual arguments
I am certain this explains the Whys of the fact that creationist do not remain
Let's me make sure I understand what you're saying. You believe creationists are visiting EvC Forum much less often because we divert their attention with detail, causing them to ignore the more fundamental issues.
What do you think of the theory that both evolutionists and creationists are coming here less often because:
  • EvC Forum is intended for use on desktop and laptop computers, not mobile devices. Most people are pecking away at tiny screens where EvC Forum is hard to use.
  • Most people are using social media sites rather than destination sites like EvC Forum.
  • Several developments, namely Dover, the move of ICR from California to Texas and their loss of accreditation, and a general change in creationist strategy that doesn't include tackling science head-on, have resulted in many fewer creationists being interested in debating creation/evolution.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 8:27 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 8:36 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 82 of 107 (782814)
04-29-2016 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Dawn Bertot
04-28-2016 10:32 PM


Re: Learn to read Dawn
Dawn, you're not making much sense. In the same way that a Universalist is an adherent to the Universalist faith, not the inventor or discoverer, a creationist is an adherent to creationist beliefs, again, not the inventor or discoverer.
This shouldn't have to be explained. It would be nice if you could contribute to the discussion instead of having to have it explained to you.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2016 10:32 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 8:50 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 83 of 107 (782815)
04-29-2016 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Percy
04-29-2016 7:51 AM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
Well this post of yours addressed nothing that I actually said except to restate what I said
I believe I gave you my reasons as to why we visit less. Listing my reasons and not responding to them is hardly a response
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 7:51 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:40 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 84 of 107 (782816)
04-29-2016 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Percy
04-29-2016 8:04 AM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
These are cursory reasons they have nothing to do with the real reasons we abandon the issues.
You do see a certain irony here correct?
Side tracking me from discussing the actual issue of creation and why we don't discuss it in greater numbers distracts from the issue of discussion of creation correct?
So is your goal to continue to down size our numbers or do you want to discuss creationism, as you folks call it
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:04 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 85 of 107 (782817)
04-29-2016 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Dawn Bertot
04-29-2016 8:29 AM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
Dawn Bertot writes:
I believe I gave you my reasons as to why we visit less. Listing my reasons and not responding to them is hardly a response.
I thought it was clear I was asking if those are really your reasons why fewer creationists visit here now. Since you say they are I'll address them:
  • Evolutionists are arrogant and pompous.
Are you saying there was a time when evolutionists weren't arrogant and pompous, that we've changed? Because if you read the old threads it sure doesn't look like they provide you any support.
  • Evolutionists do not follow the evidence where it leads.
So you're claiming that evolutionists are so poor at following the evidence where it leads that creationists don't see the point of discussing with them anymore? Have evolutionists gotten worse at this since the heyday of EvC Forum back in the first half of the two thousand aughts? Seems very unlikely.
  • The scientific method ignores reason and science.
So you're saying that the scientific method is so poor at reason and science that creationists don't see the point of discussing with people who use it? Has the scientific method changed since the heyday of EvC Forum? Seems very unlikely.
  • "Creation and design are not religious or Biblical issues," but we can't reject the "Biblical explanation of creation" because we weren't there, and the Bible tells us how the science of origins works.
This is contradictory. You're saying that creation and design both are and are not Biblical issues.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 8:29 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 8:52 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 88 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 9:12 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 89 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 9:20 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 91 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 9:35 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 95 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 11:45 AM Percy has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 86 of 107 (782818)
04-29-2016 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Percy
04-29-2016 8:16 AM


Re: Learn to read Dawn
Percival
I'm afraid it's you not making much sense.
You or I can't be an adherent to what is or is not.
I'm not an adherent to gravity, it simply is.
In the same way I'm not an adherent to observable creation
Principles, they either are or they are not.
Now my purpose in making this distinction earlier was to point out that you fellas refer to creationism, as if it is something we invented ,something we just choose to believe and that it is not supported I'm any way by actual evidence.
By ignoring and not responding to arguments in this area the so called creationist losses interest in discussing these issues and we simply find better things to do

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:16 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 87 of 107 (782819)
04-29-2016 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Percy
04-29-2016 8:40 AM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
I'll respond to your post 85 in just a few

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:40 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 88 of 107 (782821)
04-29-2016 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Percy
04-29-2016 8:40 AM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
Misrepresentation must be the watch word here, I said nothing of the sort.
Creation principles can in no way be Initially biblical or any other storied issues, they are simple observable facts, sustained by reason.
The Bible simply reports what is, there's no contradiction
It's not that the SM has changed, its simply that it has never allowed what is actually science to be science. It implies that design is not present because we did not see the designer designing. But with the same breath states that all things are here by soley natural causes, having never observed the event of that alleged hypothesis
It has one standard for itself another for us.
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:40 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 89 of 107 (782822)
04-29-2016 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Percy
04-29-2016 8:40 AM


Re: It's not the Internet that's Changed
Question Percival
Is creation an observable fact in nature the same way Soley Natural causes are observable in nature?
Next, if creation is observable, is it science To deduce it in nature the same way you conclude soley natural causes, for the explanation of things.
IOWs if you did not observe the actual creation of the universe by Soley Natural Causes are you still doing science, or did your science stop when you started speculating
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Percy, posted 04-29-2016 8:40 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by jar, posted 04-29-2016 9:32 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 90 of 107 (782823)
04-29-2016 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Dawn Bertot
04-29-2016 9:20 AM


Dawn, that is not the topic of this thread.
Dawn, that is not the topic of this thread. If you would like to discuss that please start a new topic at Proposed New Topics.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 9:20 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2016 9:38 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024