| Creation & Evolution Forum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too. |
 | | 
5th November 2009, 02:19 AM
|  | PeteAce - In memory of WinAce
33   
| | Join Date: 30th June 2002
Posts: 8,425
Blessings: 2,093,383
Reps: 9,311,669,886,675,212 (power: 9,311,669,886,693) | | Originally Posted by hangback  I have always been led to believe that when it comes to creationism there was nothing to discuss, creationism is a belief that Genesis 1 is the literal truth, how can a belief be discussed? any discussion would just go around in circles.
Any discussions can only be had between two people who believe the same thing, anyone else just would not understand the belief.
Well, there are some that claim that creationism is scientific (i.e. ICR, AiG, etc) who attempt to use science to prove it. Those types of things usually got discussed here in the past.
The last poster who would get into the sciences was Mark Kennedy, but he seemed to bow out from such discussions as of late for various reasons (being deployed a big one, I imagine).
As for other creationsits, maybe they've just given up after having their arguments refuted? 
__________________
Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution |
5th November 2009, 02:38 AM
| | Regular Member
 
| | Join Date: 3rd November 2009
Posts: 324
Blessings: 1,061,225
Reps: 5,664,041,946,084 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by Pete Harcoff Well, there are some that claim that creationism is scientific (i.e. ICR, AiG, etc) who attempt to use science to prove it. Those types of things usually got discussed here in the past.
Science deals in facts, if religions could call on facts they would not be called faiths, ID and the creation museum are just ways of making money. |
5th November 2009, 03:12 AM
|  | Senior Member
29  
 | | Join Date: 6th March 2007
Posts: 1,923
Blessings: 1,053,209
Reps: 3,978,662,265,867,660 (power: 3,978,662,265,873) | | Originally Posted by Pete Harcoff I find it ironic this thread was closed because it was an "apologetics thread".
Someone (preferably the OP) should contact that moderator and explain that because creationism's primary (*cough* only *cough*) support is the bible, discussing the bible is relevant to C+E. Since one of the arguments we hear in favor of creation so often is "Gods Word vs Man's Word", I think discussing who wrote the bible would be directly relevenat.
__________________
On "illegal" immigration:
"Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free..." -The Statue of Liberty
On the alleged connection between Hitler and Atheism:
"For it was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties." -Hitler, Mein Kampf, Volume II, Chapter X
On gay marriage (or any other discrimination) and the Bible:
"God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean." -Paul the Apostle, Acts 10:28 |
5th November 2009, 03:26 AM
|  | The Moon is a reflection of the MorningStar
| | Join Date: 11th August 2007
Posts: 5,781
Blessings: 4,078,254 My Mood 
Reps: 56,734,881,133,185,528 (power: 56,734,881,133,195) | | Originally Posted by Pete Harcoff Well that's more or less irrelevant to what I was trying to raise. It seems the lack of GA has resulted in a vacuum which the C/E forum (and maybe some of the other forums) has turned into.
I've noticed a lot of creationists don't really bother to discuss things related to C/E, instead skipping right to the apologetics. AV1611VET is a prime example of this.
I think the main reason for this is creationism is a form of apologetics. It ether attacks science or makes excuses but never provides any facts or evidence for its case. |
5th November 2009, 08:09 AM
|  | Christian Humanist
34   
| | Join Date: 6th June 2007
Posts: 3,377
Blessings: 96,290 My Mood 
Reps: 9,850,322,343,169,634 (power: 9,850,322,343,177) | | | Pete, I wonder if part of the issue is that the majority of creationist talking points have little to no science content whatsoever.
We have a few creationists who like to season their statements with a dash of metaphysics and pseudoscience, but it seems the most common objections use apologetics to defend a bowdlerized interpretation of the Bible. I think these objections, even if they could be considered off-topic, should still be addressed alongside the science. Even if that does make for an annoying game of wack-a-mole.
__________________
Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power.
-- Eric Hoffer
Last edited by TheManeki; 5th November 2009 at 08:29 AM.
|
5th November 2009, 08:35 AM
|  | Stop QWERTYface!
43  
| | Join Date: 25th December 2003 Location: Dallas
Posts: 18,118
Blessings: 4,928
Reps: 93,489,950,375,983,120 (power: 93,489,950,376,010) | | Originally Posted by TheManeki Pete, I wonder if part of the issue is that the majority of creationist talking points have little to no science content whatsoever.
We have a few creationists who like to season their statements with a dash of metaphysics and pseudoscience, but it seems the most common objections use apologetics to defend a bowdlerized interpretation of the Bible.
The solution to that issue is to ignore their nonsense and demand they get back to the science. If all they have is PRATTs so be it. More productive dialogue will come from PRATT refutation than 10 or 15 people responding to the village idiots off topic antics.
__________________
(The Library of Alexandria) questioned the permanence of the stars, but did not question the justice of slavery - Carl Sagan in Cosmos |
5th November 2009, 09:58 AM
| | Christian Humanist
34
| | Join Date: 6th June 2007
Posts: 3,377
Blessings: 96,290 My Mood
Reps: 9,850,322,343,169,634 (power: 9,850,322,343,177) | | Originally Posted by USincognito The solution to that issue is to ignore their nonsense and demand they get back to the science. If all they have is PRATTs so be it. More productive dialogue will come from PRATT refutation than 10 or 15 people responding to the village idiots off topic antics.
That seems a little counterproductive. Creationist apologists tend to distrust any science that runs afoul of their beliefs, so it seems unlikely that they would bother to learn it on their own. However, if they stick around as they apologize for their beliefs, they might actually learn something.
Additionally, they might get the wrong idea that nobody wants to debate them because their arguments are irrefutable, as opposed to off-topic. Now if we could get some heavy moderation in here to remove off-topic posts, then it would make it very clear what is and what is not appropriate. But what are the chances that would happen?
__________________
Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power.
-- Eric Hoffer |
5th November 2009, 10:58 AM
| | Not so new...
69   
| | Join Date: 7th October 2009 Location: Nottingham, England
Posts: 822
Blessings: 67,622
Reps: 19,106,485,257,974,720 (power: 19,106,485,257,977) | | | Can someone tell me what GA stands for. General Assembly? Go Away? Get the Atheists? |
5th November 2009, 11:05 AM
| | Christian Humanist
34
| | Join Date: 6th June 2007
Posts: 3,377
Blessings: 96,290 My Mood
Reps: 9,850,322,343,169,634 (power: 9,850,322,343,177) | | Originally Posted by Mike Elphick Can someone tell me what GA stands for. General Assembly? Go Away? Get the Atheists?
GA is shorthand for "General Apologetics," a CF forum which was shut down a little while ago. I'm not sure why, though.
__________________
Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power.
-- Eric Hoffer |
5th November 2009, 11:07 AM
|  | SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
57   
| | Join Date: 18th June 2006 Location: United States
Posts: 2,126,164
Blessings: 2,934,947,672 My Mood 
Reps: 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (power: 9,223,372,036,856,908) | | Originally Posted by Mike Elphick Can someone tell me what GA stands for. General Assembly? Go Away? Get the Atheists?
General Apologetics
It used to be the sub-forum of choice here for those who wanted to roll up their sleeves and get down to business in debating.
But it was becoming, in my opinion, more and more like Blasphemy Central --- if you know what I mean.
If I remember correctly, Administration stepped in and temporarily closed it to allow us to cool down and see what it would be like w/o it.
When they reopened it, it was just as nasty as ever, if not moreso.
Admin graciously closed it.
__________________ GOD SAID IT -- THAT SETTLES IT
| | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
