Why "YEC"/Fundamentalist Creationism is BAD for America

I've explained to you multiple times the exceptions to your false dichotomy.

A gradual emergence with no discernible beginning.Two half-verses, with their own existence, combining to make a whole universe.Or, you know, something like the Big Bang model where time is a component of the universe, itself, and thus the question of a beginning is meaningless.But we've been over this before. You never acknowledge that there's other options and then some time goes by and you just repeat your tired old refuted claim again.Pretty much the same behavior that we see from the YEC's. Its one of the ways in which YEC is bad for America.You just can't budge on your position, despite any explanation or evidence, and then you go on holding the position regardless.

No, as stipulated, there is no discernible beginning. But they are not the universe existing in some form. And those two half-universes emerged from two quarter-universes each. There is no at T=0, its an asymptote. But I have. Multiple times now. With explanations how they refute you. Your behavior shows this to be a lie. You will just dig your heels in further and maintain your belief in spite of all the evidence and explanations. No, you will keep your position regardless. And we'll all watch it happen (its already begun).That's one of the problems with YEC. They already think they're right and nothing anyone ever says can change that. You're exhibiting this behavior exactly.

Um, the OP self-proclaims himself to be a deist...

Well thank god we have you here to set us straight! Well, apart from the whole believing in god thing. Psh, Thomas Jefferson rewrote the Bible and took all the magic out of it...I think your arrogance exhibits one of the reasons that creationism is bad for America.It takes a certain amount of conceit to think that you can take some writing from a guy who calls himself a deist and "determine" that they really aren't one.Or call all scientists atheist liberals.The hubris, its maddening.

Seems like it could be applied to Creationism:

quote:

---

The faith passes, so to speak, through a distiller and becomes ideology. And ideology does not beckon [people]. In ideologies there is not Jesus: in his tenderness, his love, his meekness. And ideologies are rigid, always. Of every sign: rigid. And when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought For this reason Jesus said to them: ‘You have taken away the key of knowledge.’

---

Vatican Radio

Where do you draw the line?You have a backbone, so you're Cordata, you're a Mammal, and a Primate, and a Hominid, and a Homo sapiens.They really only start calling them "apes" when you get to Hominid, so lets look at the qualifiers for that:

quote:

---

• large, tailless primates
• omnivorous
• mobile shoulder joints and arms due to the dorsal position of the scapula
• broad ribcages that are flatter front-to-back
• a shorter, less mobile spine
• Gestation lasts 8—9 months, and results in the birth of a single offspring, or, rarely, twins.
• The young are born helpless, and they must be cared for for long periods of time.
• a remarkably long adolescence, not being weaned for several years.

---

Does any of that not describe you?Or maybe you don't like being a Primate? Let's look at the qualifiers for that:

quote:

---

• forward-facing eyes on the front of the skull
• A bony ridge above the eye sockets reinforces weaker bones in the face which are put under strain during chewing.
• skull has a large, domed cranium,
• generally have five digits on each limb
• with keratin nails on the end of each finger and toe
• collar bone is retained as prominent element of the pectoral girdle; this allows the shoulder joint broad mobility
• a reduced snout
• lost most of their incisors, all retain at least one lower incisor

---

Again, does any of that not describe you?I understand people not wanting to think that they are apes, as it gives a connotation they are uncomfortable with.But without any bias, and just looking at the morphology, humans are clearly classified as Hominids, i.e. apes.

Okay, regardless of the origin, and based upon the classification systems that are used, a human is an ape, right? Wait right there, without simply denying the classification outright, take a look at what the requirements are (that I posted), and you'll find that you do not disqualify for any of them, and that is why you should be classified as a primate.Can you do that? Think of your father's father's father's father's father. Then think 10 times that much. There was some ubergrand-father of your's, that was "smacking you over the nut and banging your wife" to others.And if you think back to Darwin's seemingly racist quotes about the "savages", and also realize that the point he was making was that all of our forefathers were once in that state, then can you get a sense of the broader message of unity that he was actually to make?We are all apes. That is what we are.

Actually, it does, regardless of whether or not you, personally, accept the classification. You do not have the ability to decide that you don't belong to that classification.You also don't have the ability to decide that you are not an ape.

That's not true. I'm a Christian. No, you were talking about belonging to the classification, regardless of whether or not you accept it, if you belong to the classification then you do belong. One of the things you are not free to do, because its impossible, is discount yourself from a classification just because you don't accept the ramifications of belonging to it.