ICR Acts and Facts

[nolidad]

This speaks to the psychology of creationists which is characterized by a high Need for Closure (aka Need for Cognitive Closure). High Need for Closure refers to an intolerance for uncertainty.

Nope! We hold to lots of uncertainties- see you mock us as the faith based people! then say we don't like uncertainty!

 

[nolidad]

For individuals (e.g. creationists) with high Need for Closure any knowledge which is necessarily incomplete or uncertain can cause anxiety. This is why science is so unappealing in contrast to dogmatic religion. Dogmatic religious beliefs offer an unwavering certainty that science can't provide in the same regard.

Don't ever become a mind reader! You really are lousy at it!

Bible believing Christians- we don't hold to dogmatic beliefs- we hold onto a living relationship with living God who reigns over the universe! That kills anxiety all the time!

 

[nolidad]

What did you actually read? I'm sure you wouldn't mind citing some of your favorite papers or other publications.

I will try to find them tomorrow! I am officially retired now! So if I forget (and that is a real possibility) remind me! I don't intend to be rude, but I do forget things at time- especially with the amount of repsonses and the speed you and several others post here!

 

[Speedwell]

Don't ever become a mind reader! You really are lousy at it!

Bible believing Christians- we don't hold to dogmatic beliefs- we hold onto a living relationship with living God who reigns over the universe! That kills anxiety all the time!

You appear to hold to the dogmatic belief that accepting the Bible as the inspired word of God requires you to believe that Genesis is 100% accurate literal history and have been quite nasty to those who don't agree with you about it.

 

[pitabread]

Nope! We hold to lots of uncertainties- see you mock us as the faith based people! then say we don't like uncertainty!

This is backed up by research. Far from being mocking, it appears to be just the reality of the situation.

You can read about the need for closure here: Closure (psychology) - Wikipedia

Study here on anti-evolution beliefs and correlation with need for closure here: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-01935-005

Study on religion and need for closure: https://www.researchgate.net/public...m_The_need_for_closure_as_related_to_religion

Study on religious fundamentalism and correlation with need for closure here: https://waset.org/publications/1000...ognitive-closure-and-religious-fundamentalism

 

[pitabread]

Bible believing Christians- we don't hold to dogmatic beliefs

Do you think it's possible that Genesis doesn't refer to a literal history of the Earth and universe?

 

[nolidad]

Well the "how" in this case is via the process of evolution (e.g. change in gene pools over time). We know how organisms reproduce, how changes to genomes can change phenotypes, and how such changes can be distributed through populations via further reproduction over time.

No one is arguing that mutations CAN change things-- but with every one saying evolution is a fact- you have to show not that it CAN change phenotypes but that IT DID change phenotypes to the degree macro evolutionary hypotheses say they did.

Well I might be back later tonight. If not tomorrow is my first day as a former postal carrier!

 

[Gene2memE]

Well then show me scales to feathers by random undirected mutations preserved by natural selection and I will flee this post with my tail tucked between my legs! But please don't show me carefully planned and designed experiments that couldn't even produce a feather!

I've already provided you with links showing very strong genetic evidence that feathers are modified scales. And that there was a large and novel expansion of genome coding for feathers in the process of feather evolution .

Allllll the way back in post #32.

You, plainly, didn't read what was provided. Or if you did, you either didn't comprehend it or have failed to retain the information presented.

Those articles provide a very good jumping off point if you want to understand the fundamentals of the evolution of feathers. But, you don't seem to be actually interested in educating yourself.

Here's my question to you: what are you afraid of?

It's clear that you're shying away from the cognitive loads required to actually understand what posters here have been presenting you with. Your continual errors, mis-understandings and topic shifting are evidence of that.

What is it about properly understanding evolutionary biology that prompts such a response?

I have a hypothesis, but I'd like to hear your response.

 

[HitchSlap]

don't know her thesis! Why don't you write her? she will answer.

I'll look into it.

And you are wrong- she still does lots of research

Reeeeeally... got a source for this?

as well as teaching and rebutting evolutionary genetic hypotheses.

Have you watched the AiG videos? She's a cartoon character.

graduated in 2000 from Ohio State University after earning her Ph.D. in molecular genetics [3]. Soon afterward, she became a biology professor at Mount Vernon Nazarene University in Ohio, where she was employed for six years [4]. Today, she works for Answers in Genesis as their first female full-time researcher and speaker who holds to the literal translation of the Bible (including the book of Genesis) and the belief in a young earth [

Ok, thanks.

ETA: HA! found this... A Person Who Has Never Been Responsible for a Scientific Publication is Called a “Renowned Genetics Expert”

From the article:
Nice to know that according to Christian Today, a person who has never been responsible for even a single scientific publication in her life is a “renowned genetics expert.” According to these “Christian” criteria, I can call myself a renowned expert in gynecology, renaissance wood carving, the microbiology of skin diseases, Mandarin semiotics, and the history of Padua.

 

[pitabread]

ETA: HA! found this... A Person Who Has Never Been Responsible for a Scientific Publication is Called a “Renowned Genetics Expert”

From the article:
Nice to know that according to Christian Today, a person who has never been responsible for even a single scientific publication in her life is a “renowned genetics expert.” According to these “Christian” criteria, I can call myself a renowned expert in gynecology, renaissance wood carving, the microbiology of skin diseases, Mandarin semiotics, and the history of Padua.

Wow, that's embarrassing. I guess it speaks to how desperate creationists are have 'credentialed' creationists in their fold.

 

[HitchSlap]

Wow, that's embarrassing. I guess it speaks to how desperate creationists are have 'credentialed' creationists in their fold.

It seems they just don’t get it.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Then get ready to change your story. The space probe Voyager 2 is approaching the Oort Cloud now.

Where'd you get that from? My understanding is it's left the heliosphere but is still 300 years away from the Oort Cloud.

 

[the iconoclast]

Stop quotemining me.

I'm not responsible for your education.

Hey hey sir

Are you suggesting that you didnt say these things?

 

[the iconoclast]

It seems they just don’t get it.

Hey hey slap

What are we missing?

 

[HitchSlap]

Hey hey slap

What are we missing?

Reality.

 

[Shemjaza]

Hey hey sir

Are you suggesting that you didnt say these things?

Quoting with context removed that gives a different meaning is a deeply dishonest action.

For example, one could say the Bible says God doesn't exist:
KJV, Psalm 14:1:
"There is no God."

Quote mining is lying.

 

[the iconoclast]

Quoting with context removed that gives a different meaning is a deeply dishonest action.


For example, one could say the Bible says God doesn't exist:

KJV, Psalm 14:1:

"There is no God."


Quote mining is lying.

Hey hey shem, havent you got a discussion with me already? I think you need to concentrate all your efforts there, ill wait patiently for you to respond Dont run off on me, it is now time for a discussion.

So you have accused me of quoting out of context and you used scripture to confirm your accusation.

So lets check out psalm 14:1
The fool says in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, their deeds are vile;
there is no one who does good.

So to quotemine psalm 14:1 - leaves us with this statement "there is no God". This statement misrepresents the whole context and leaves us with a meaning that is not intended by the author.

Lets check out the whole context of 3 replies @VirOptimus has made.

Page 33 of ICR Acts and Facts

Post 653
"Evolution is observed."

Post 650
"Evolution is a fact."

And

Page 48 of Why evolution isn't scientific

Post 943
"My response is in no way incompatible with Kylies answer.

The ToE just is."

You were kind enough to give me an example using the bible, could you show me how i quotemined these 3 statements by @VirOptimus.

Would you accept this as an answer "God just is"?

Cheers

 

[the iconoclast]

Reality.

It seems we creationists just don’t get it. We creationists are missing the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.

How do things actually exist in contrast to what idealistic or notional idea?

Im calling you out and i believe the atheist position is weak.

Cheers and i want a discussion with you!

 

[Jimmy D]

"Evolution just is"
And
"Evolution is observed".

Statements with nothing to back em up.

What's with the winky thing, are you being sarcastic?

 

[Speedwell]

Where'd you get that from? My understanding is it's left the heliosphere but is still 300 years away from the Oort Cloud.

Just needling him. It is approaching (getting nearer to) the Oort cloud now, is is not? Of course by the time it gets there it may no longer be capable of sending us data, but never mind. Creationists have already had to back down from their denial of the existence of the Kuiper Belt. The Oort cloud will have its turn, too, if not because of the Voyagers then some other probe.