Creationism - Lazy Man's science?

[Garnett]

The "Goddidit" principle behind Creationism has been argued by many to be a cop-out, an easy answer for the person who doesn't want to ask questions or learn.

Examples often picked up are:

The reversal:
Understander of Evolution: "Evolution is science, Creationism is a belief."
Creationist: "Evolution is a belief"

The disparity of evidence required:
Creationist: Give me one bit of evidence for ToE.
Understander of Evolution: look at this fossil.
Creationist: That fossil's missing a toe bone. Therefore YEC must be correct.

Inability or unwillingness to understand importance of empirical evidence:
Understander of Evolution: Here is empirical evidence for evolution. You cannot provide empirical evidence for YEC because there isn't any.
Creationist: Here is subjective proof of YEC.

Repeated inaccuracy (away from this forum aka the Lie)
Creationist: Look at Y, that is evidence for YEC.
Understander of Evolution: That is false because X
Long pause
Creationist: Look at Y, that is evidence for YEC.

Mostly the arguments of Creationists are things they repeat knowing them to be untrue, or glib phrases, and semantics.

This takes very little effort, and no great amount of thought or study to learn and it neatly fits in with another general theme running through many Creationists which is a dislike of education ranging from smug philistinism to outright hostility.

I suppose to many it seems like stating the obvious to say most Creationists have reached their conclusions based on "very little effort, and no great amount of thought or study" but what I want to know is why any Creationist can believe this aversion to education is what their God wants, unless they live happily in a self-delusional paradox having shaped the religion into something that can best fit their own natural aversion to the rigours of learning and any other prejudices and flaws they wish to maintain.

So I guess I want to know what people think: Is Creationism just lazy man's science?

 

[Mjonller]

In my point of view creationist believe that because of faith, which I have seen that faith requires you to believe in other things than what the proof is. Unless there was a way to prove it they way they want it, they will choose to believe in what they will. It isnt lazy, its faith which drives them to do so.

 

[Edx]

Its lazy, but its not science.

 

[JohnR7]

The "Goddidit" principle behind Creationism has been argued by many to be a cop-out, an easy answer for the person who doesn't want to ask questions or learn.

That is NOT what the Bible says. It is though wisdom and knowledge that God created this world so that we are able to understand how He did it. In fact now that we understand what we do about DNA we have a better understanding then ever before about how God creates life through letters and the spoken word. This is what the Hebrews have been saying all along when they talk about the Language of God.

 

[dawiyd]

It's pseudo science at the very most.

 

[Hydra009]

So I guess I want to know what people think: Is Creationism just lazy man's science?

Not lazy per se, imo, just really really zealous. Creationism is for people whose religious beliefs eclipse everything else in their lives, and can't understand/accept evolution for fear of its perceived threat to these religious beliefs.

 

[Garnett]

Not lazy per se, imo, just really really zealous. Creationism is for people whose religious beliefs eclipse everything else in their lives, and can't understand/accept evolution for fear of its perceived threat to these religious beliefs.

I know what you're saying, but it also just so happens that it is a very easy stance to take, wouldn't you agree? To be able to consider yourself especially pious for deciding you're not going to ask any more questions or work at learning about your environment is like the icing on a cake you're being paid to eat.

 

[JohnR7]

pseudo science at the very most.

Evolution is pseudo science at the very most.

 

[Tomk80]

Evolution is pseudo science at the very most.

The people who actually practice science disagree with you.

 

[Garnett]

It's pseudo science at the very most.

Evolution is pseudo science at the very most.

The reversal:
Understander of Evolution: "Evolution is science, Creationism is a belief."
Creationist: "Evolution is a belief"

JohnR7, you would be funny if you are not guilty of doing this all over the rest of the forum.

 

[Hydra009]

I know what you're saying, but it also just so happens that it is a very easy stance to take, wouldn't you agree? To be able to consider yourself especially pious for deciding you're not going to ask any more questions or work at learning about your environment is like the icing on a cake you're being paid to eat.

Definitely. It's a lot harder to learn about the planet than to simply assert something about it dogmatically and claim divine infallibility.

 

[AngryNotice]

you have to be educated ins cience to know about creationism. the cold hard truth is that is to many people creationism is "fake" but the only fake this in reality is evolution and its package theories that evolutionists/old earthers/earth movers believe in. will believing in those get you to heaven??? not likely!

 

[I_Love_Cheese]

you have to be educated ins cience to know about creationism. the cold hard truth is that is to many people creationism is "fake" but the only fake this in reality is evolution and its package theories that evolutionists/old earthers/earth movers believe in. will believing in those get you to heaven??? not likely!

He's Baaack

 

[Pete Harcoff]

So I guess I want to know what people think: Is Creationism just lazy man's science?

As others have suggested, it's appears to be more about faith than laziness. But there is really is a lot less to creationism than any mainstream science. Especially telling is the general understanding and education in the mainstream sciences of creationists versus evolutionists. Creationists, in general, don't seem to know as much nor have the relevant educations.

And the fact that even "professional" creationists still haven't answered basic problems with creationism (i.e. flood layers, kind classifications, etc) shows how bankrupt it really is.

Meanwhile, science marches on...

 

[AngryNotice]

Creationists, in general, don't seem to know as much nor have the relevant educations.

And the fact that even "professional" creationists still haven't answered basic problems with creationism (i.e. flood layers, kind classifications, etc) shows how bankrupt it really is.

Meanwhile, science marches on...

hmmm last i checked it seemed that creationists had the word of God to support their facts. what does evolutionist theories have??????? ideas maintained by fallaible man. man deceives himself all the time into thinking wthe wrong things. its not our obligation to find evidence for the truths when they are writte in in the bible for you read.

 

[Dannager]

ideas maintained by fallaible man.

The above is an accurate description of all religions too, Christianity included.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

He's Baaack

Hence, why God invented the "ignore" feature.

 

[steen]

you have to be educated ins cience to know about creationism. the cold hard truth is that is to many people creationism is "fake" but the only fake this in reality is evolution and its package theories that evolutionists/old earthers/earth movers believe in. will believing in those get you to heaven??? not likely!

HEEEYYYYYY!@@!@!!! You were Poe-ing us last time.

 

[AV1611VET]

The "Goddidit" principle behind Creationism has been argued by many to be a cop-out, an easy answer for the person who doesn't want to ask questions or learn.

Jesus didn't believe in Evolution. So why should we, who are His followers, believe in it?

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Jesus didn't believe in Evolution. So why should we, who are His followers, believe in it?

Jesus didn't believe in the Internet either. Why are you using the Internet?