Is Creationism a Fairy Tale?

[sfs]

String theory, multiverse theory, dark matter, and Higgs boson.

Higgs is my current favorite. Higgs postulated that the only reason energy particles have "mass" is due to an invisible field that acts like jello and resists the movement of things. This gives them "mass.

His original paper was rejected by a Physics Journal as having "No particular relevance to Physics." Peer review showing its true nature.

Yeah, that did show the true nature of peer review: sometimes it's incompetent. What makes Higgs's idea science is that it had testable consequences; when the test was done, the prediction turned out to be correct. You were aware that they'd actually found this particular fairy tale creature, right?

 

[Delphiki]

The video doesn't even deal with evolution, it's more an argument against abiogenesis. What's the connection?

Actually, it's more like an argument against spontaneous generation, which Darwin's work sought to disprove. Ironic, isn't it?

 

[Delphiki]

Yeah, but creationism isn't really a fairy tale either, if you want to be restrictive. For one thing, no one believes fairy tales are true.

Sure they do. It's just that more of them grow out of Brothers Grimm than they do Moses as they get older.

 

[AV1611VET]

String theory, multiverse theory, dark matter, and Higgs boson.

Higgs is my current favorite. Higgs postulated that the only reason energy particles have "mass" is due to an invisible field that acts like jello and resists the movement of things. This gives them "mass.

His original paper was rejected by a Physics Journal as having "No particular relevance to Physics." Peer review showing its true nature.

My point is, though, that even though it may have generated debate, it hasn't generated nearly as much debate as the evolution-creation controversy; which, in my opinion, has surpassed any debates in history -- even global warming, abortion, and women's lib.

So when someone refers to creationism as a "fairy tale," they are, in essence, saying scientists have chased this "fairy tale" all through history for some reason.

In other words, calling creationism a "fairy tale" is only insulting scientists, not creationists.

Have you ever seen scientists chasing Humpty Dumpty through history with their clipboards?

 

[AV1611VET]

Yeah, but creationism isn't really a fairy tale either, if you want to be restrictive. For one thing, no one believes fairy tales are true.

Ya -- "fairy tale" was made up by creationists to explain creationism, wasn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

Actually, it's more like an argument against spontaneous generation, which Darwin's work sought to disprove. Ironic, isn't it?

I added that video in anticipation of someone doing that very thing to claim that our side calls evolution a "fairy tale" as well.

If the video is confusing you guys, just pretend it isn't there and address the point of the OP please.

(Of course, that would be a miracle, wouldn't it?)

 

[madaz]

When did the academic world ever pay any attention to the christians creation tale?

 

[sfs]

Sure they do. It's just that more of them grow out of Brothers Grimm than they do Moses as they get older.

I was being serious. People who passed on fairy tales didn't think they were true. This is in marked contrast to creationism.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If creationism is a fairy tale, what other fairy tale has generated so much debate and gotten so much attention in the academic world?

To answer your question in your thread title, "Is creationism a fairy tale?" it's not. It's an etiological myth.

Therefore, the separate question in your actual OP, "If creationism is a fairy tale..." is invalid.

 

[sfs]

My point is, though, that even though it may have generated debate, it hasn't generated nearly as much debate as the evolution-creation controversy; which, in my opinion, has surpassed any debates in history -- even global warming, abortion, and women's lib.

So when someone refers to creationism as a "fairy tale," they are, in essence, saying scientists have chased this "fairy tale" all through history for some reason.

In other words, calling creationism a "fairy tale" is only insulting scientists, not creationists.

Have you ever seen scientists chasing Humpty Dumpty through history with their clipboards?

Scientists, with rare exceptions, do not chase creationism. They do not argue against it and rarely think about it at all. They view it as the bizarre superstition of ignorant, deluded fanatics.

ETA: Creationism is, in fact, an excellent tool for driving scientists away from ever taking Christianity at all seriously. If that's your goal, creationists, you're doing a great job.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Have you ever seen scientists chasing Humpty Dumpty through history with their clipboards?

Have you ever seen anyone worship Humpty Dumpty?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Scientists, with rare exceptions, do not chase creationism. They do not argue against it and rarely think about it at all. They view it as the bizarre superstition of ignorant, deluded fanatics.

Indeed -- were it not for those ignorant, deluded fanatics -- who are, in fact chasing the scientists -- creationism would be ignored.

ETA: Creationism is, in fact, an excellent tool for driving scientists away from ever taking Christianity at all seriously. If that's your goal, creationists, you're doing a great job.

Not just scientists -- creationism drives people away left, right, and center.

 

[AV1611VET]

To answer your question in your thread title, "Is creationism a fairy tale?" it's not.

So theoretically I shouldn't see anyone with an education referring to creationism as a fairy tale ... right?

 

[AV1611VET]

Scientists, with rare exceptions, do not chase creationism.

So if anyone here does, they are either an Internet scientist, or a "rare exception"?

They do not argue against it and rarely think about it at all.

You would know better than I would, but if this site is any indication of scientists in general, I would disagree with you.

They view it as the bizarre superstition of ignorant, deluded fanatics.

Based on what, specifically? bias? training? research? emotions?

ETA: Creationism is, in fact, an excellent tool for driving scientists away from ever taking Christianity at all seriously. If that's your goal, creationists, you're doing a great job.

You have to blame it on someone, don't you?

It's not going to wash in the end, though.

 

[AV1611VET]

Have you ever seen anyone worship Humpty Dumpty?

Have you ever seen anyone worship creationism?

 

[TLK Valentine]

So theoretically I shouldn't see anyone with an education referring to creationism as a fairy tale ... right?

Wrong.

Just because a person has an education doesn't mean they're familiar with the technical meanings of terms such as "fairy tale," "myth," or "legend" -- or that they'd care if they did. Many people prefer to use these terms in the more common parlance.

 

[Aman777]

Indeed -- were it not for those ignorant, deluded fanatics -- who are, in fact chasing the scientists -- creationism would be ignored.

Not just scientists -- creationism drives people away left, right, and center.

Dear TLK, I see you go to all sorts of threads in able to demonstrate your hatred for God and His children. God said that He Created, but Lucifer always disagreed. It seems you do too. Do you want God's Children to believe your foolishness? If so, then quit fighting against Creationism since that IS God's Truth, and the Opposite of YOUR position.

In Love,
Aman

 

[TLK Valentine]

So if anyone here does, they are either an Internet scientist, or a "rare exception"?

If any here does, they're wasting their time.

You would know better than I would, but if this site is any indication of scientists in general, I would disagree with you.

Luckily this site isn't, then.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Dear TLK, I see you go to all sorts of threads in able to demonstrate your hatred for God and His children.

And I see you're following me. People will talk.

And either show where I have demonstrated a hatred for God, or retract your slander.

 

[AV1611VET]

Indeed -- were it not for those ignorant, deluded fanatics -- who are, in fact chasing the scientists -- creationism would be ignored.

Interesting.

Do I detect some bias here?

Not just scientists -- creationism drives people away left, right, and center.

It depends on where you're going, I guess.