The Right Way to Debunk

Try addressing the actual evidence Percy. Some people are mistrustful of the scientific establishment. Some are skeptical about studies and what gets published in scientific journals. (You missed me I bet LOL.) The creationists I've been debating with all think science itself is a massive conspiracy and that scientists are all liars. You start to run out of logical tactics you can use with people who are thinking that way.Why am I an evolutionist when you know I've got views on other things called woo-woo here? Because I look at radiometric dates for rocks. I look at the fossil record. The geological column. Those are things I can see for myself -- in museums, and outside. Mountains of hard evidence. Cold, hard, undeniable facts. Maybe instead of debating about what gets published in journals and which scientists agree or disagree, you can try to get back to basic facts. I can't promise this will work with creationists either but it's worth a go.

Very good points Jon. They explain a lot. BTW I'm still mainly lurking here and getting info so don't expect more entertaining debates with me about woo-woo.So in order to get the creos to move forward in their arguments, we help them to understand that there is no threat to their beliefs from evolution. But is that strictly true? It requires them to believe that much in the Bible is metaphorical, and that the humans who wrote the Bible could have made errors. Most Christians take what they see as the universal truths from the Bible and don't worry so much about the rest. But if you start to think deeply about it, you may begin to wonder why the Bible is even needed when those universal truths can also be found in other places, and why "the rest" is there in the Bible.Speaking for myself, when I finally got the chance to learn about other religions and mythologies in college, I suddenly realised that I was narrowing my world view by believing what the Bible told me, and that it was written by humans in an ancient culture whose needs it suited at the time. If I'd never been educated about what other people in the world believe then I might well have carried on being a devout Catholic.So maybe what I'm saying is that there is no threat as long as you don't probe too deeply into things. Otherwise, your faith might get blown out of the water. I'm delighted with what happened to me personally, but I think a lot of people would find themselves in the sort of spiritual crisis that Glenn Morton faced. He was only able to remedy this for himself by tweaking some of his literal interpretations of the Bible and I'm not sure how satisfied he is with that.Also, don't forget that creos who are members of a congregation are not going to want to risk being ostracised by their flock.In the face of all this, what else do you do when debators have got you in a corner? Hold onto your lifeline and tell everyone else they're lying.I think Phat would be a good person to contribute here.

And springboarding from you, there's a problem when someone decides to turn off the rational part of their brain and deny everything. I explicitly pointed out what Hovind's fake credentials are, supported by evidence, and still they defend him. I honestly don't get it. So he's lying about being a high school physics teacher, lying about having an accredited PhD, and yet what they tell me is that his qualifications are still better than mine and I'm not a scientist so I'd better shut up.I am the only evolutionist there, and there are about 6 creationists regurgiposting and calling me an evil liar. Is there any place on this forum to invite some help . . .?I tried posting the Clergy Letter too, thinking that some sense from other Christians might help, but they just looked up the denominations of the people who have signed it and said they are liberal infidels who allow homosexual marriage.I keep explaining how their regurgiposts are making unscientific claims but they ignore this.These people are in their own world and I'm not going to shake it. However, maybe the sorts of creos who come to a forum like this are generally more "malleable" and open to seeing the flaws in their beliefs? Or perhaps some are just so arrogant that they think they're going to teach the scientists a thing or two, I don't know.I do know that when someone here feels "ganged up" then the natural reaction is to go into defense mode. It's happened to me enough. You can't keep up with everyone's posts and you feel isolated and besieged. Maybe backing off a bit and giving some space would help. You could try inviting a creo onto The Great Debate maybe.

This is great. You spoke to Dr. Dino yourself did you? You really do some good work, I've read debates you've had with other creos.The problem here is that the ones I'm talking with are ignoramuses. I was asking why 40,000 year old ice core samples from Greenland didn't show any evidence of a global flood and the best one of them could do was say "ice floats and ice melts," and thereafter whenever I referred to this she claimed she'd answered me and asked why I was still pestering. I seriously don't think something as abstract as math is going to pin them down in any way and I don't think any of them would even understand what 10 to the nth power is, let alone how to do basic calculations with it.Have you seen Buddika's 300 Creationist Lies Index? The whole thing exhaustively debunks Hovind.We're certainly on a Gish stampede but it's because they regurgipost passages, which only takes a second, and refuting them can take hours for someone like me who isn't a scientist and has to trawl the web for info. At least it ties them down to some easily debunked claims, which is better than the usual vague comments of "do your homework," "know thyself," and "I'm an expert on the Bible and you aren't."

I'm not sure it's worth persevering to be honest. It's impossible to know how many lurkers there are. There's definitely something to be said, though, for giving creos a bit of a sense of security in a debate so that they will move their argument on. I like RAZD's ideas. They also start feeling bold when there are a few of them, as opposed to one, and then you can get something going as well.Nator I'll give you the URL but bear in mind that this is actually a large forum with many different areas, some of which I am certain you would frown upon as being woo -- people are not in those areas to debate. The place where creationists and evolutionists talk is the forum I will link you to and you'll find enough there to keep you happy I daresay. Don't tell them I sent ya BTW the only moderator is the list owner and he allows everything apart from trolling. No one gets reprimanded for anything. Creation and Evolution: What Do You Think?The busy threads right now are "Leftover Turkey? Turn it into Oil!" and "Where Did Cain Find His Wife?"

In that case Ringo, I'd better get back to my Bible and throw out everything those nefarious evolutionists taught me because several creationists keep telling me I'm dead wrong.

I can't believe I've seen your cartoony face over there RAZD. Have fun but keep in mind that you have just summarised Russ' posts perfectly: vague, off-topic rants. Usually sprinkled generously with Biblical quotes and links to creationist and conspiracy sites.How long before you think it's a waste of your time? added in edit
I see you've been busy there, and Percy has decided to visit too. That forum could be a very good testing ground for some of the ideas here about how to get creos to move their arguments on. If either of you succeed in actually getting them to pin their arguments down with evidence in the first place then you'll deserve congratulations. Anyway it's nice to see you there.I'll try to learn from your polite, non-threatening debate style RAZD. I've been on that creo forum for some time by myself and have patiently endured all kinds of character assassinations. It will reflect better on me if I continue to cultivate patientce and try to use a bit more tactfulness I think.Edited by LindaLou, : No reason given.

Keep it short and sharp -- got it.The problem I have there is that a creo can write a short, sharp post which in essence is a list of erroneous assertions, each of which takes a substantial post in itself to debunk. Then they complain that my posts are too long.I've been picking one or two things out of each regurgipost and addressing those, then saying I can address the rest if anyone wants me to. Funny but they never do.

This is hilarious. I could use this. "How does the sun burn? Discuss."Presumably they think that an explosion would ignite the whole of Jupiter. The Cassini and Gallileo probes both photographed lightning on Jupiter, which presumably ought to be enough to make it go "poof."

I think this is a good point Percy. I will do my best to apply it.The parrot-mode I get in post after post is:Evolution says rocks can turn into humans.
Life is too complex to have evolved by random chance.
Science is a conspiracy because other conspiracies exist.I have refuted these a dozen times over. New strategies will be very useful.

I spent hours this morning refuting a regurgipost of some Henry Morris rubbish about how radiometric and isochron dating are unreliable. A tall order for someone who doesn't understand these things very well. At least the poster I was replying to is throwing out points like that, even if they are copied from the creationist overlords. Others there usually are deliberately vague, avoid science issues altogether, or are completely on another planet.I had no idea there'd be so much interest in my link to that forum. You guys are good. I'm not sure where all this is going to end up but at least at the moment I'm not trying to keep up with several prolific creo posters by myself. Anyone reading is of course welcome to join, but if too many evos go there they might perhaps get suspicious that I recruited reinforcements . . .added in edit Yep, that is what has happened. I've had to fess up. Russ is going to find a way to get rid of us I suspect.added in edit RAZD I'm almost falling out of my chair laughing. You are so taking the piss, as we say over the pond. SoSick is a complete nutcase and she also seems to know even less about science than the others on that forum. I am stuyding your style, it's masterful. Edited by LindaLou, : No reason given.Edited by LindaLou, : No reason given.Edited by LindaLou, : No reason given.

Hi Nator, missed ya Let me turn this around.I came to this forum in admiration of the scientific knowledge here, the intelligence, the logical arguments. And I enjoyed watching creos squirm.I learned a heckuva lot very quickly. There are a number of what I'd call Dawkins-type dogmatic skeptics here and I never had looked into what was before, but I learned as they proceeded to "debunk" my own arguments. Do you know what I did after I left here? I looked up alternative science sites to get some satisfaction. I found out about Rupert Sheldrake. I'm much more clear now on where I stand with my own beliefs and where others stand here. Maybe at some point when I've done still more thinking, and feel more confident, I'll start discussing those things again here.As I said earlier, the evidence for evolution is there for me to see. I can see fossils, I can see that they came out of strata in the geological column. It's a bit different from telling me that this drug will help me or this herb will harm me; that interpretation is more prone to being biased by the agenda of the claimant -- even if these opinions come from clinical studies published in journals.BTW there are other people around the area of that creationist forum who are not creationists. I just seem to be the only one who wants to spend the time and energy talking to them.Edited by LindaLou, : No reason given.

Thank you kindly for the advice Percy. A number of people here did say to me that if something works for me, then that's OK. The herbs and vitamins I take work for me. I learned about some aspects of what I'm doing from another area of that forum. You see, though some of the people there go to extremes and totally deny reality, seeing conspiracies in everything, they do appear to have a redeeming virtue. That is, they do not allow themselves to be limited by what orthodoxy says is right and correct. For example Russ may exhibit the usual bigotry of a fundamentalist, but he does not belong to a church; he seems to think he's got it all worked out himself and I think he'd like to have his own followers. (I've called him on his messiah complex before. I've also asked him in the past to come here but strangely he never showed any interest.)Great discoveries do not usually stem from people who do not question whether the system, whatever system that may be, has got it wrong in some way. Rupert Sheldrake would fall into this category I think. I knew you'd like him He's bold and imaginative int the classic mold of the British eccentric. Please don't start a thread on him yet though, I don't have the time and I haven't gone into his ideas in a lot of depth yet so I wouldn't be able to argue very well anyway.You seem to be frustrated that the discussions on the creationist forum jump around everywhich way. I agree, it's hard to keep people on topic. I also think RAZD is going to end up banging his head against the wall with the particular people he's talking with. Can I ask what drives you both to talk with people like that? What makes you feel it is a good use of your time?Nator, if you're reading, I can't seem to find your posts there . . .?

Strange, I've got good antivirus software and it's never flagged a problem with that site. Three people from here have recently joined -- I wonder if they have had any trouble?

That's very suspicious. Very.