I've noticed a new trend on these boards, one which I hope has not taken flight in the apologetics or Creationism vs. Evolution communities in general, which is that Creationists seem to be learning (gasp!). That's right. It seems that the old PRATT lists have died down (at least temporarily) and have been replaced mainly by ID propaganda (on these forums, led by Wellman-- much, I'm sure, to our collective chagrin).
The Creationists seem to be evolving.
I personally draw quite a parallel between this new Creationist trend and modern bacteria, who have grown to become resistant to antiobiotics, due to our over-infatuation with the latter (Not to get off track, but a phenomenon only possible if evolution is correct). Creationists, using their amazing skills of deductive logic, may have finally realized that the old way of relentless PRATT rambling in an attempt to ware down the enemy, is failing. Thus, they have decided to take another shape, under a different name, employing a different stratagem.
This feeling of mine was brought to a head when in Wellman's Hawking thread Gladiatrix posted a link in which part of the title read "The New Creationism", the subject obviously being Intelligent Design. Aha, I said; I smell a rat. I wouldn't be surprised if this reaches to the highest levels of Creationist organization. I have a feeling pretty soon most of the well-known YEC groups will jump on the bandwagon and adopt their new mantra.
So what's so different about ID anyway? Well, so far, instead of basing all its argumentation on outdated evidence and laughable pseudo-science, ID seems instead to rely on the highly popular Argument From Authority coupled with out-of-context quote-mining (the latter being a technique originally learned and put to good use under IDers' old Creationist guise), whether it be Flew, Hawking, or some "super super smart" Christian evangelist who has "never lost a debate in his life except once, on a semantic technicality". This species is tricky, because though easy to spot, it is convincing enough to sway the minds of, say, 90% of the general population.
Of course, I hope I'm wrong. I hope this is all just in my mind and I'm paranoid and Wellman is an isolated incident. Then again, I have been seeing more and more articles in the newspaper and spots on TV about school boards validating ID, or school boards putting stickers on books saying "evolution is only a theory". Every week, it seems, I hear a new story straight from Alabama about some self-proclaimed scientific expert who only moonlights as a school board member and who "just wants their child to know there's more than one choice". We may see some serious court battles soon in this country.
It's seems to be a growing trend, but I don't know. I'd like feedback to know that I'm not alone, or better yet, that I am. Am I wrong or right? In any case, I wish Hume was still around.
The Creationists seem to be evolving.
I personally draw quite a parallel between this new Creationist trend and modern bacteria, who have grown to become resistant to antiobiotics, due to our over-infatuation with the latter (Not to get off track, but a phenomenon only possible if evolution is correct). Creationists, using their amazing skills of deductive logic, may have finally realized that the old way of relentless PRATT rambling in an attempt to ware down the enemy, is failing. Thus, they have decided to take another shape, under a different name, employing a different stratagem.
This feeling of mine was brought to a head when in Wellman's Hawking thread Gladiatrix posted a link in which part of the title read "The New Creationism", the subject obviously being Intelligent Design. Aha, I said; I smell a rat. I wouldn't be surprised if this reaches to the highest levels of Creationist organization. I have a feeling pretty soon most of the well-known YEC groups will jump on the bandwagon and adopt their new mantra.
So what's so different about ID anyway? Well, so far, instead of basing all its argumentation on outdated evidence and laughable pseudo-science, ID seems instead to rely on the highly popular Argument From Authority coupled with out-of-context quote-mining (the latter being a technique originally learned and put to good use under IDers' old Creationist guise), whether it be Flew, Hawking, or some "super super smart" Christian evangelist who has "never lost a debate in his life except once, on a semantic technicality". This species is tricky, because though easy to spot, it is convincing enough to sway the minds of, say, 90% of the general population.
Of course, I hope I'm wrong. I hope this is all just in my mind and I'm paranoid and Wellman is an isolated incident. Then again, I have been seeing more and more articles in the newspaper and spots on TV about school boards validating ID, or school boards putting stickers on books saying "evolution is only a theory". Every week, it seems, I hear a new story straight from Alabama about some self-proclaimed scientific expert who only moonlights as a school board member and who "just wants their child to know there's more than one choice". We may see some serious court battles soon in this country.
It's seems to be a growing trend, but I don't know. I'd like feedback to know that I'm not alone, or better yet, that I am. Am I wrong or right? In any case, I wish Hume was still around.
!
it was done by a superpowerful being! yea!"
