Is the fundamental gap between creationists and non-creationists...

[Frank Robert]

Yockey, Fred Hoyle, Axe, and others.

Isn't it interesting that all of them share your beliefs. Did you know that beliefs are limiting factors which is why scientists go to great lengths to eliminate the influence of their beliefs.

 

[Mr Laurier]

Yockey, Fred Hoyle, Axe, and others.

None of these are "evolutionists".

 

[Speedwell]

No, read the year.

 

[driewerf]

... a disagreement over basic reality?

I find a lot of discussions with creationists seem to be boil down to disagreement over the nature of reality. And I'm not sure that there is a way to bridge such disagreement.

Sorry to be late to the party.
I just saw a video on Youtube that was revealing.

Now, I don't expect everybody to watch an hour+ video, so short summary.
A christian apologetic poses as an atheist in front of an audience of christian high school students and get questioned. After 50 something minutes he reveals who he really is, and teaches the students about how to approach non believers.
A lot of the questions were origin/science related. For them being an atheist means to embrace science. By the way the christian apologetic didn't anything to refute that image. At 1:03:30 a girls asks a very telling question:" You were telling about the whole science stuff, about the multiverse and stuff I couldn't understand. Why would anybody belief all that? Is it easier for them than believing in a god? Like they're guilty?"
These students are an honest reflection of what they have been thought over the years, by their parents, their ministers, their teachers. Science is for atheists. Science is an atheist's a substitute for god.
Basically that girl's question came down to a total rejection of science as unsuitable for christians. And she was NOT refuted by anyone.

That is at least one fundamental gap between creationists and smart people.

 

[Speedwell]

It's not that creationists aren't smart people, just that they have been intentionally misinformed. They have been misinformed about science and they have been misinformed about the beliefs of other Christians. It's really sad.

 

[driewerf]

It's not that creationists aren't smart people, just that they have been intentionally misinformed. They have been misinformed about science and they have been misinformed about the beliefs of other Christians. It's really sad.

Not in this day and age. There are ton and tons of material available for free on the internet. Suitable for all levels of understanding, from the "... made easy" to highly academical textbooks.
See the people here. As Subduction Zone posted yesterday; when he proposes to go ver the basics of science, he gets crickets (as he put it).
Same for me, I looked for links about the scientific method and the nature of science, to be dismissed less than 5 minutes (see the exchange between NBB and me: What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?).

By now the ignorance of creationists is nothing more than self perpetuating stupidity.

 

[Speedwell]

Not in this day and age. There are ton and tons of material available for free on the internet. Suitable for all levels of understanding, from the "... made easy" to highly academical textbooks.
See the people here. As Subduction Zone posted yesterday; when he proposes to go ver the basics of science, he gets crickets (as he put it).
Same for, I looked for links about the scientific method and the nature of science, to be dismissed less than 5 minutes (see the exchange between NBB and me: What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?).

By now the ignorance of creationists is nothing more than self perpetuating stupidity.

Learning anything real about science on your own is difficult and requires some amount of application and effort. It's hard to take that initiative if you are an ordinary person without much real basic education in science (and perhaps not even much interest in it) when your trusted religious leaders are constantly hammering on you to believe that you are the only real Christians, the only real theists, and all others are atheists trying to undermine the basis of your faith. Why should a person make the effort to learn about science if he has been taught from childhood that it's a satanic lie?

 

[driewerf]

Learning anything real about science on your own is difficult and requires some amount of application and effort. It's hard to take that initiative if you are an ordinary person without much real basic education in science (and perhaps not even much interest in it) when your trusted religious leaders are constantly hammering on you to believe that you are the only real Christians, the only real theists, and all others are atheists trying to undermine the basis of your faith. Why should a person make the effort to learn about science if he has been taught from childhood that it's a satanic lie?

Which is the very description of self perpetuating stupidity. And maybe I don't blame the young people. But the adults in charge are greatly responsible. Worse, your government should intervene and set standards. Your country (and hence humanity) is wasting a huge potential.

And learning science is hard? Yes and no. As I said, there is material available for all levels of understanding. There are excellent ... made easy series on Youtube, for starters.
Here is but one:

There are full sites with textbooks. there are discussion boards. When forum members here offer help it is denied.
Speaking if being willfully blind.

 

[Speedwell]

Which is the very description of self perpetuating stupidity. And maybe I don't blame the young people. But the adults in charge are greatly responsible. Worse, your government should intervene and set standards. Your country (and hence humanity) is wasting a huge potential.

The government has set standards, which is why the State of Arkansas is attempting to resist them.

 

[driewerf]

And a fw days ago I wrote:

Yeah, learning science requires an effort.
Learning calculus is harder than simply believing in god.
Learning genetics is harder than simply believing in god.
learning geology is harder than simply believing in god.
Learning histology is harder than simply believing in god.
Creationists are basically lazy.

 

[Speedwell]

And a fw days ago I wrote:

And learning about something which you have been thoroughly indoctrinated to believe is a satanic lie is harder than simply believing in God.

 

[chad kincham]

None of these are "evolutionists".

Douglass Axe

After completing his PhD at Caltech, he held postdoctoral and research scientist positions at the University of Cambridge and the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre. His research, which examines the functional and structural constraints on the evolution of proteins and protein systems, has been featured in many scientific journals, including the Journal of Molecular Biology, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, BIO-Complexity, and Nature,

 

[Speedwell]

Douglass Axe

After completing his PhD at Caltech, he held postdoctoral and research scientist positions at the University of Cambridge and the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre. His research, which examines the functional and structural constraints on the evolution of proteins and protein systems, has been featured in many scientific journals, including the Journal of Molecular Biology, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, BIO-Complexity, and Nature,

What makes him an "evolutionist?"

 

[VirOptimus]

Douglass Axe

After completing his PhD at Caltech, he held postdoctoral and research scientist positions at the University of Cambridge and the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre. His research, which examines the functional and structural constraints on the evolution of proteins and protein systems, has been featured in many scientific journals, including the Journal of Molecular Biology, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, BIO-Complexity, and Nature,

Refuting the ToE is every scientists dream, it would assure fame, money and a place in history.

That noone has speaks volumes about its robustness.

 

[AV1611VET]

Refuting the ToE is every scientists dream, it would assure fame, money and a place in history.

Ya ... science puts a bounty on reality.

 

[chad kincham]

Not in this day and age. There are ton and tons of material available for free on the internet. Suitable for all levels of understanding, from the "... made easy" to highly academical textbooks.
See the people here. As Subduction Zone posted yesterday; when he proposes to go ver the basics of science, he gets crickets (as he put it).
Same for me, I looked for links about the scientific method and the nature of science, to be dismissed less than 5 minutes (see the exchange between NBB and me: What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?).

By now the ignorance of creationists is nothing more than self perpetuating stupidity.

Ridiculous and untrue insult.

There are thousands of creationists with PhDs who are far from ignorant, and some have organizations that explain why macro evolution is untrue, that delve deeply into the science.

Such as Stephen Meyer PhD and his Creation Institute.

Such as Professor Gary Parker, who taught evolution in college, and wrote a pro evolution textbook, before eventually realizing macro evolution does not occur, and became a creationist - and he explains the science claims vs science facts very well.

Or Professor Dean Kenyon, famous evolution proponent, who wrote a very successful book on chemical evolution/abiogenesis titled Your Biochemical Destiny, before eventually realizing abiogenesis is impossible and becoming a creationist.

Or Professor of synthetic and organic chemistry Professor James Tour, who explains in great detail why abiogenesis cannot occur.

BTW he has had 160 peer reviewed articles published, holds over 200 patents in his field of chemistry and nano technology.

Or astrophysicist Dr. Hugh Ross, who outlines explicitly why abiogenesis cannot occur:

Is the Chemical Origin of Life (Abiogenesis) a Realistic Scenario?

None of these people or the thousands like them, are stupid OR ignorant,vand it’s ludicrous to claim they are.

Smug condescension from evolutiinistx, and claims that we just don’t understand the science behind it or we’d accept it as fact, and that we are ignorant and stupid, are false.

 

[VirOptimus]

Ya ... science puts a bounty on reality.

Please elaborate.

 

[chad kincham]

Not in this day and age. There are ton and tons of material available for free on the internet. Suitable for all levels of understanding, from the "... made easy" to highly academical textbooks.
See the people here. As Subduction Zone posted yesterday; when he proposes to go ver the basics of science, he gets crickets (as he put it).
Same for me, I looked for links about the scientific method and the nature of science, to be dismissed less than 5 minutes (see the exchange between NBB and me: What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?).

By now the ignorance of creationists is nothing more than self perpetuating stupidity.

Ridiculous and untrue insult.

There are thousands of creationists with PhDs who are far from ignorant, and some have organizations that explain why macro evolution is untrue, that delve deeply into the science.

Such as Stephen Meyer PhD and his Creation Institute.

Such as Professor Gary Parker, who taught evolution in college, and wrote a pro evolution textbook, before eventually realizing macro evolution does not occur, and became a creationist - and he explains the science claims vs science facts very well.

Or Professor Dean Kenyon, famous evolution proponent, who wrote a very successful book on chemical evolution/abiogenesis titled Your Biochemical Destiny, before eventually realizing abiogenesis is impossible and becoming a creationist.

Or Professor of synthetic and organic chemistry Professor

None of these people or the thousands like them, are stupid OR ignorant,vand it’s ludicrous to claim they are.

Smug condescension and claims that we just don’t understand the science behind it or we’d accept it as fact, and we are ignorant and stupid, is false.

Isn't it interesting that all of them share your beliefs. Did you know that beliefs are limiting factors which is why scientists go to great lengths to eliminate the influence of their beliefs.

Untrue.

Dawkins is a prime example of your erroneous claim.

 

[chad kincham]

What makes him an "evolutionist?"

Try re reading what I wrote.

 

[Speedwell]

Try re reading what I wrote.

Writing for a Discovery Institute house organ would rule him out on its own.