Please tell me what you see.

[automan]

In the past I have slagged Creationists off at every opportunity, well not this time.

This is a question for Creationists only.

As an Atheist I can be forgiven for not understanding how a Creationists mind works.

So could you please tell me what you think when you look at certain things.

Things like a 50 ton granite boulder in the middle of a field when the nearest granite rocks
are 100 miles away,
(I don't know if you have them in the US but we have lots of them in the UK, a left over from the ice age)
coastal cliffs with the rock formations twisted from the horizontal to the vertical,
underground caves tens of miles long and as wide as cathedrals in some places,
fossils of dinosaurs and other long dead animals,
trawlers bringing up Mammoth bones in their nets from the middle of the North sea,
fossilized bones of Polar bears and Bison in caves in the middle of England,
a Black or a Chinese person,
Mountains and Deserts.

If you could go through them one at a time and tell me what you think if/when you saw/see them.
it would clear up a lot of questions about how you see the world.
Thanks

 

[Opethian]

The question is pointless, because the creationists need for their belief is so strong that any explanation, how implausible it may be, that allows them to uphold their beliefs, is better than any explanation, how plausible it may be, that makes them have to adjust their beliefs.

Most people act/reason like this when they see a phenomenon like the ones you describe:

1. What do I know about this phenomenon? If I don't know much about it, I will look up scientific information on the subject until I feel I can have a rational discussion about it.
2. After processing the information and all the possible explanations, I will pick out the one that seems most plausible to me.
3. I will explain with founded arguments why I think a certain explanation is most plausible. If someone shows me better arguments for a different explanation, I will accept this (unless I'm really stubborn and/or arrogant), since I don't have any beliefs that require the phenomenon to have arisen one way or the other.

I think most creationists I've seen act/reason somewhat like this:

1. What do I know about this phenomenon? If I don't know much about it, it doesn't matter. What matters is that people are trying to use this phenomenon to attack a literal interpretation of the bible, which I believe to be the only way to eternal happiness after this temporary physical existance. Either I will just ignore it, or I will try and find a defense for my beliefs. In the last case, I will search only specific creationist resources to find "information".

2. Even though I don't know much about the subject, I will just copy and paste whatever I find from creationist resources as a defense. Understanding the arguments is not important, their validity is not important. What is important is that I have at least something to defend my precious beliefs.

3. If I really do not find a way to defend my beliefs rationally, I'll just use a cop out like a worldwide conspiracy, miracles, god's mysterious ways etc...

The reason creationists do not accept sound rebuttals of their literal beliefs, is because they do not think: "is this valid or not". They think "is this valid or not if my literal beliefs are true, which is obviously not to be questioned". The question "are my literal beliefs true?" never comes up. The answer for them is yes, and anything that opposes that answer must be automatically wrong, without even considering the arguments and evidence. They do not see how absurd their beliefs are, because they never even rationally consider the arguments and evidence against them. Their analysing, critical reason somehow remains inactive when reading arguments against their position.

 

[automan]

The question is pointless, because the creationists need for their belief is so strong that any explanation, how implausible it may be, that allows them to uphold their beliefs, is better than any explanation, how plausible it may be, that makes them have to adjust their beliefs.

Most people act/reason like this when they see a phenomenon like the ones you describe:

1. What do I know about this phenomenon? If I don't know much about it, I will look up scientific information on the subject until I feel I can have a rational discussion about it.
2. After processing the information and all the possible explanations, I will pick out the one that seems most plausible to me.
3. I will explain with founded arguments why I think a certain explanation is most plausible. If someone shows me better arguments for a different explanation, I will accept this (unless I'm really stubborn and/or arrogant), since I don't have any beliefs that require the phenomenon to have arisen one way or the other.

I think most creationists I've seen act/reason somewhat like this:

1. What do I know about this phenomenon? If I don't know much about it, it doesn't matter. What matters is that people are trying to use this phenomenon to attack a literal interpretation of the bible, which I believe to be the only way to eternal happiness after this temporary physical existance. Either I will just ignore it, or I will try and find a defense for my beliefs. In the last case, I will search only specific creationist resources to find "information".

2. Even though I don't know much about the subject, I will just copy and paste whatever I find from creationist resources as a defense. Understanding the arguments is not important, their validity is not important. What is important is that I have at least something to defend my precious beliefs.

3. If I really do not find a way to defend my beliefs rationally, I'll just use a cop out like a worldwide conspiracy, miracles, god's mysterious ways etc...

The reason creationists do not accept sound rebuttals of their literal beliefs, is because they do not think: "is this valid or not". They think "is this valid or not if my literal beliefs are true, which is obviously not to be questioned". The question "are my literal beliefs true?" never comes up. The answer for them is yes, and anything that opposes that answer must be automatically wrong, without even considering the arguments and evidence. They do not see how absurd their beliefs are, because they never even rationally consider the arguments and evidence against them. Their analysing, critical reason somehow remains inactive when reading arguments against their position.

I hope you are wrong but I fear you are right.

 

[Impaler]

The question is pointless, because the creationists need for their belief is so strong that any explanation, how implausible it may be, that allows them to uphold their beliefs, is better than any explanation, how plausible it may be, that makes them have to adjust their beliefs.

Most people act/reason like this when they see a phenomenon like the ones you describe:

1. What do I know about this phenomenon? If I don't know much about it, I will look up scientific information on the subject until I feel I can have a rational discussion about it.
2. After processing the information and all the possible explanations, I will pick out the one that seems most plausible to me.
3. I will explain with founded arguments why I think a certain explanation is most plausible. If someone shows me better arguments for a different explanation, I will accept this (unless I'm really stubborn and/or arrogant), since I don't have any beliefs that require the phenomenon to have arisen one way or the other.

I think most creationists I've seen act/reason somewhat like this:

1. What do I know about this phenomenon? If I don't know much about it, it doesn't matter. What matters is that people are trying to use this phenomenon to attack a literal interpretation of the bible, which I believe to be the only way to eternal happiness after this temporary physical existance. Either I will just ignore it, or I will try and find a defense for my beliefs. In the last case, I will search only specific creationist resources to find "information".

2. Even though I don't know much about the subject, I will just copy and paste whatever I find from creationist resources as a defense. Understanding the arguments is not important, their validity is not important. What is important is that I have at least something to defend my precious beliefs.

3. If I really do not find a way to defend my beliefs rationally, I'll just use a cop out like a worldwide conspiracy, miracles, god's mysterious ways etc...

The reason creationists do not accept sound rebuttals of their literal beliefs, is because they do not think: "is this valid or not". They think "is this valid or not if my literal beliefs are true, which is obviously not to be questioned". The question "are my literal beliefs true?" never comes up. The answer for them is yes, and anything that opposes that answer must be automatically wrong, without even considering the arguments and evidence. They do not see how absurd their beliefs are, because they never even rationally consider the arguments and evidence against them. Their analysing, critical reason somehow remains inactive when reading arguments against their position.

That seems to cover the creationist mindset pretty well. It always baffles me how anyone can be so accepting of something. It took me until the age of 8 to lose my belief in the Christian god yet these people believe in something their whole lives without ever stopping to question it.

 

[automan]

It covers it so well I think it's worth a thread of it's own,
it will get no post from the Crevo's but at least they would read it, well the first part at least,
they will overt their eyes from the last part.

 

[Mincus]

Will take a guess at the answers you'll get, if any:

In the past I have slagged Creationists off at every opportunity, well not this time.

This is a question for Creationists only.

As an Atheist I can be forgiven for not understanding how a Creationists mind works.

So could you please tell me what you think when you look at certain things.

Things like a 50 ton granite boulder in the middle of a field when the nearest granite rocks
are 100 miles away,
(I don't know if you have them in the US but we have lots of them in the UK, a left over from the ice age)

Flood put it there.

coastal cliffs with the rock formations twisted from the horizontal to the vertical,

Flood caused it somehow.

underground caves tens of miles long and as wide as cathedrals in some places,

Once again, that wonderful flood!

fossils of dinosaurs and other long dead animals,

Flood!

trawlers bringing up Mammoth bones in their nets from the middle of the North sea,

More flood!

fossilized bones of Polar bears and Bison in caves in the middle of England,

Flood swept them there.

a Black or a Chinese person,

Accelerated micro-evolution.

Mountains and Deserts.

Flood!

If you could go through them one at a time and tell me what you think if/when you saw/see them.
it would clear up a lot of questions about how you see the world.
Thanks

Not very explanatory, I admit, but that seems to be the general answer for those things I've seen from lurking. Flood almost makes sense for some, but not others.

 

[spblat]

The reason creationists do not accept sound rebuttals of their literal beliefs, is because they do not think: "is this valid or not". They think "is this valid or not if my literal beliefs are true, which is obviously not to be questioned". The question "are my literal beliefs true?" never comes up. The answer for them is yes, and anything that opposes that answer must be automatically wrong, without even considering the arguments and evidence. They do not see how absurd their beliefs are, because they never even rationally consider the arguments and evidence against them. Their analysing, critical reason somehow remains inactive when reading arguments against their position.

It covers it so well I think it's worth a thread of it's own,
it will get no post from the Crevo's but at least they would read it, well the first part at least,
they will overt their eyes from the last part.

Yes. Opethian's staggeringly important observation isn't just about creationism, it's about the mindset of faith, and its built-in immunization against reason and logic. But there is hope.

 

[GodsSpartanSoldier117]

In the past I have slagged Creationists off at every opportunity, well not this time.

This is a question for Creationists only.

As an Atheist I can be forgiven for not understanding how a Creationists mind works.

So could you please tell me what you think when you look at certain things.

1.Things like a 50 ton granite boulder in the middle of a field when the nearest granite rocks
are 100 miles away,
(I don't know if you have them in the US but we have lots of them in the UK, a left over from the ice age)
2.coastal cliffs with the rock formations twisted from the horizontal to the vertical,
3.underground caves tens of miles long and as wide as cathedrals in some places,
4.fossils of dinosaurs and other long dead animals,
5.trawlers bringing up Mammoth bones in their nets from the middle of the North sea,
6.fossilized bones of Polar bears and Bison in caves in the middle of England,
7.a Black or a Chinese person,
8.Mountains and Deserts.

If you could go through them one at a time and tell me what you think if/when you saw/see them.
it would clear up a lot of questions about how you see the world.
Thanks

1.The first thing that came to mind was that God put it there (why not?). The flood could also be a good reason like Mincus said.
2.I think it could have been from the flood, but more likely it's just a natural formation that God created.
3.Uh, why can't caves be big? They were created by God that big, and some erosion and stuff of that sort could have happened to help it along.
4.Fossils are just remains of animals that have been preserved so that we can study them. I don't know how that whole process works, but I know God created it to work.
5.That could have been either the flood or the fact that wooly mammoths probably lived in the North (it's cold) and if a huge chunk of ice broke off, the animal could have fallen in, drowned, and taken by a current.
6. I don't know how they got their, they could have been wandering down from up north when the continents were still connected and gone into the caves (bears do like caves).
7. Uh, I think this part of the genetics that are stronger in some people than with others. It's like dogs, if you keep breeding differents types, you'll get other types.
8. First, God created them that way. That much is obvious. 2nd, some of it could have been done by erosion and the flood.

 

[automan]

1.The first thing that came to mind was that God put it there (why not?). The flood could also be a good reason like Mincus said.
2.I think it could have been from the flood, but more likely it's just a natural formation that God created.
3.Uh, why can't caves be big? They were created by God that big, and some erosion and stuff of that sort could have happened to help it along.
4.Fossils are just remains of animals that have been preserved so that we can study them. I don't know how that whole process works, but I know God created it to work.
5.That could have been either the flood or the fact that wooly mammoths probably lived in the North (it's cold) and if a huge chunk of ice broke off, the animal could have fallen in, drowned, and taken by a current.
6. I don't know how they got their, they could have been wandering down from up north when the continents were still connected and gone into the caves (bears do like caves).
7. Uh, I think this part of the genetics that are stronger in some people than with others. It's like dogs, if you keep breeding differents types, you'll get other types.
8. First, God created them that way. That much is obvious. 2nd, some of it could have been done by erosion and the flood.

Perhaps you are right, and I am the crazy one,
I should really know better than to even think about asking questions when I know what the answer will be before I ask the question.
In fact there are only two answers to ANY questions asked of a creationist.
The flood or God did it.

The mind boggles, how the hell did we get as low as this, instead of going forward we are going backwards,
the lunatics want to run the asylum.

 

[automan]

Why don't the creationists stand up for their beliefs? why are they always on the back foot?
defending defending all they ever do is defend they never attack, I understand it is difficult
because they don't have a lot in their arsenal but they have been defending for so long you
would think they would either attack or pack it all in as a waste of time.
I know if every time I said something I was shot down and made to look silly, I would soon
get the message something was wrong with my arguments.

We know they walk around with their eyes shut, (the book says 6000 years so that's it, what ever
I see is a lie and must be disregarded)
and they must obviously have their minds shut to any outside influences for the same reason.

Get a grip on yourselves you are a disgrace.

 

[Defuret]

Things like a 50 ton granite boulder in the middle of a field when the nearest granite rocks
are 100 miles away,

Moved there by glaciers from the ice ages.

coastal cliffs with the rock formations twisted from the horizontal to the vertical,
underground caves tens of miles long and as wide as cathedrals in some places,

Various effects of water erosion, how the earth ended up essentially.

fossils of dinosaurs and other long dead animals,
trawlers bringing up Mammoth bones in their nets from the middle of the North sea, fossilized bones of Polar bears and Bison in caves in the middle of England,

Extinct animals who did not survive natural selection and died millions of years ago, whose bones became fossilized.

a Black or a Chinese person,

Differing human genetics, which became so through evolution.

Mountains and Deserts.

1. Areas in which plates of the earth's crust hit each-other. 2. Areas effected by a lack of rain, frequently caused by mountains nearby.

Dolts, it's called theistic evolution. Everyone in this forum is so extremist it's ridiculous. Either "u creationists R so stupid evolution works and u ALL 100% of you tink it dosnt!!!1111!!!1" or "I can't bring myself to intrepret the bible non-literally!!!!1111!!11!". Get over it. Both of you. This is such a huge waste of time.

 

[Loudmouth]

1.The first thing that came to mind was that God put it there (why not?).

Why?

Here is another situation. Let's say you come home from the store to find a busted window. On the floor amidst the broken glass is a baseball. Outside you see a bunch of kids with baseball mits milling around aimlessly. Would it be logical or reasonable to state that fairies put the baseball on the floor? Why not, right?

 

[Electron]

Why?

Here is another situation. Let's say you come home from the store to find a busted window. On the floor amidst the broken glass is a baseball. Outside you see a bunch of kids with baseball mits milling around aimlessly. Would it be logical or reasonable to state that fairies put the baseball on the floor? Why not, right?

Of course fairies put it on the floor. Why? Because I know. I just know.