To the creationists - the tough question

[QUOTE]Originally posted by toff:
A vote against a creationist is a vote for truth, for science, for freedom.[/B][/QUOTE]Alright buddy, you fight the power! Stop those evil Creation scientists!

quote:

---

Originally posted by toff:
Don't worry, I, and millions like me, DO view people who would impose their beliefs upon others as evil, and do view those who would suppress knowledge because they don't like it as evil, and are doing our best to stop creationists (one group which contains such people) from gaining the power to do so.

---

So us Creationists are imposing our views on helpless young members of society? Well, first of all, I don't think many Creationists want a "Creation-only" textbook in the classroom. Last time I checked Creationists wanted a two-model textbook. Most evolutionists don't even seem to think that textbooks should contain problems with the evolutionary theory. Upon close examination, it would seem as though evolutionists are being the most oppresive of the two groups.It also seems very morally incorrect for evolutionists to cite examples such as peppered moths or wingless beetles as "examples" of evolution in action. It is very unfair to tell students something true (variation within a kind) and then tell them it proves something else (information-gaining evolution).Next, let's see exactly what Creationists are attempting to supposedly "force" upon the helpless minds of youth in our society. They are trying to teach children to live a good life and to think of others. They are basically wishing to teach them many of the basic principles of the bible. Sounds evil to me.What are evolutionists teaching? That humans are a freak rearrangement of matter, and our most distant ancestor was a one-celled organism that arose from pond scum. Sounds like a nice story. Please give me one way in which evolutionary thought can be important for moral reasoning. After all, moral reasoning is perhaps the MOST important thing for a young individual.

I am not being unreasonable. What exactly the collosal amount of evidence points to is what we are debating in this forum.I simply thought toff was being unreasonable in saying that we are "forcing" views upon other members of society. I also don't see why he thinks Creation science is such an evil thing. It's not like we want to teach students how to be Nazis! I realize that what we hope for has nothing to do with what is true, but my point is that I don't think Creation scientists are trying to "force" views upon the helpless.

"Certainly, creationist leaders want a creation-only view taught in classrooms. They have repeatedly over the decades tried to achieve this. Settling for an 'equal time' arrangment is their current ploy. Better half the text than no mention in the text at all."Sorry buddy, but you can't chant Conspiracy, Conspiracy! without backing up your claims."I have never heard any evolutionist propose that texts on evolution should not contain details of problems with the theory, both ones which have been solved and ones which have not. Nor, I suspect, have you."Well, I've mentioned the idea in another topic, to which no evolutionist (to my knowledge) has given me approval. Also check out this site: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0107ed_bill.aspIf you honestly read the whole link I think you will see that my statement is reasonable. In addition, I have read the evolution chapters in many biology textbooks (Suprise, written by evolutionists!) and find them completely lacking of any of the difficulties with the evolutionary theory. So yes, my position is backed by significant evidence on this matter."Regarding peppered moths and so forth - sorry, they do prove it. Evolution is proven by any number of examples, of which those moths are merely one."Well if peppered moths prove evolution, I might as well just give up. I wasn't aware that natural selection in action proved evolution and falsified Creation."Then you go for the straw man - moral teachings of christianity have nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion, and are completely irrelevant. Nor does evolution have any moral teachings. It is a scientific theory, not a moral belief."Well, I have read material with evolutionists preaching moral standards, and I agree that these discussions hold no merit scientifically."And what is evil is teaching children that religious beliefs - believed by a comparitively small percentage of the population - are fact, and that scientifically established data is not fact. Sorry if you don't like it - but I believe lying to children on matters like this is wrong."Actually, Creation Scientists "evil" goal is to introduce to children the idea that there is more than one possible explanation for the history of Earth. Whereas evolutionists "valiant" goal is to exclude the discussion of difficulties with the evolutionary theory. See: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0107ed_bill.asp

Toff, I'm sorry to say that your last post is so overflowing with bias, ignorance, and arrogance."I'm not chanting anything. I'm stating simple fact, easily verifiable from the statements of any one of a number of creationist leaders. They have been trying, and will continue to try, to get evolutionary theory out of the schools and get creationism in."Well, "buddy," if there ARE any intelligent Creation scientists who believe this, I doubt much of the Creation Science community would back that position.It's also interesting to note that you responded to my post (which inquired that your claim was basless) with yet another baseless claim. You can whine all day about this supposed Conspiracy, but it is complete hogwash unless you can identify ANY evidence AT ALL that it is even REMOTELY true."*sigh* Because there ARE no significant difficulties with evolutionary theory. The difficulties are so comparatively minor that you would have to look in something a little more thorough than a biology textbook to find them."Well, in that case, mentioning the difficulties should be no problem! Actually, your claim is completely nonsensical. Ever read "Darwin's Black Box?" And again, it would be nice if you would stop with the baseless assertions that are a result of your intense bias towards the evolutionary theory."No, creationists (there are no 'creation scientists') goal is to remove evolution from the school curriculum, and replace it with creationism, teaching everyone as 'fact' their own religious belief."Hmmm. My claim (that evolutionists are unfair) had an included link. Your claim (That creationists wish to monopolize the education system) was backed with nothing. It doesn't take a really smart person to deduce which claim is more baseless. If your future responses continue in the same way, I see no reason for continuing to debate with you."And thanks for that link - I needed a good laugh. Pleasing to see there are enough rational politicians left to stop such a stupid amendment. The theory of evolution isn't in the least controversial - except as far as a comparatively few religious fundamentalists are concerned, because it upsets their religious belief. That's the only 'controversy' about it."I really don't see how I can respond to this nonsense.Toff, I don't want to start a personal debate with you. I simply want to discuss in a kind manner what the evidence points to. Your baseless assertions and claims that evolution has no flaws are making it very difficult to carry out intelligent discussion. Please don't take this as an insult, but as a suggestion to open your mind a little farther than you have shown in recent posts.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mark24:
Are you seriously telling me you have rejected the ToE without making yourself familiar with the evidence?

​

Mark

​

---

Nope. What I'm saying is that all data is the same, interpretations are different. The creation/evolution controversy is revolved around which underlying assumptions are correct.