Why is it . . .

[Vance]

. . . that the be most hostile, insulting, rude, impolite and bad-mannered posters on this board (and the Christian version) tend to be the YEC's?

I would expect to see condescending incivility from non-Christians, but it seems more often than not it is the YEC's with the attitude of "you stupid evolutionists, don't you realize your theory is a bunch of baloney!?" etc, etc, etc.

hmm, kind of reminds me of the French guys up on the castle parapets in Monty Python and the Holy Grail: "you silly ka-nig-its!"

 

[LorentzHA]

The answer is in my signature line. See the quote from Mr. Wilde .....(not Mr. Bunker)

 

[Nathan Poe]

The answer is in my signature line. See the quote from Mr. Wilde .....(not Mr. Bunker)

Although the Archie Bunker quote also fits...

 

[Drotar]

The reason why, is because most of us aren't prepared to defend Creationism. Though I'm pretty sure I never was rude, it's a tendency to resort to ad hominem arguments when you have nothing better to say. Usually it's the experienced knowledgable apologists that are always calm and polite. Since there aren't any knowledgeable apologists in the areas of ecology and evolutionary biology, many must resort to ad hominem attacks when they don't know what else to say.

That's a tendency that you see everywhere. No matter what religion or faith a person is, when they're pinned personal attacks are last resort. I've been in apologetics, mostly in philosophy for a while, and I've learned to be careful with what I say.

I mean, c'mon, haven't you noticed that the people who say that stuff to you are the ones who know the least about whatever the discussion is on?

TTYL Jesus lvoes you!

 

[Jet Black]

because they are the most wrong.

and not to worry drotar, you're one of the better ones

 

[JohnR7]

The reason why, is because most of us aren't prepared to defend Creationism.

God did not create us to be able to defend creationism?

 

[wblastyn]

God did not create us to be able to defend creationism?

Why would God want you to defend something that is not true?

Even if it were true it's pretty obvious most of you aren't prepared.

 

[JohnR7]

Even if it were true it's pretty obvious most of you aren't prepared.

If people are not prepared, then it is because they have not allowed God to prepare them. He knows the future He has for us, and He knows how to get us ready for that future. He knows the work that He wants us to do, and He is more than able to equip us to do that work. There is no lack of supply on God's part.

 

[tankiawee]

Heh, so bottom line being no defense?

 

[Chris Green]

whats a YEC ?

 

[wblastyn]

whats a YEC ?

Young Earth Creationist - they believe the universe and everything in it was created 6000 years ago over a period of 6 literal days by God.

 

[Nathan Poe]

If people are not prepared, then it is because they have not allowed God to prepare them. He knows the future He has for us, and He knows how to get us ready for that future. He knows the work that He wants us to do, and He is more than able to equip us to do that work. There is no lack of supply on God's part.

So why is it that we have yet to see one person on this board that's been sufficiently prepared by God? You'd think there'd be one creationist around here who hasn't been backed into a corner of Ad Hominems, special pleading fallacies, or off-topic ramblings. Where are they?

 

[LorentzHA]

Although the Archie Bunker quote also fits...

True. My favorite quote that I have seen, is the one in your signature line regarding, Men think epilepsy divine...

That is classic.

 

[Vance]

Drotar, I think you have hit the nail on the head.

I would add, though, that there is probably a degree of fear involved.

 

[Arthur Dietrich]

What bothers me a little more than the insults and ad hominem attacks is the fact that a lot of people seem to be unwilling or unable learn.

I borrowed my sister's biology book and skimmed through a couple of chapters on Evolution. I admit, I didn't understand it at first. Sometimes I have the feeling that I'm one of the only ones who looks stuff up. Whether in a science book or in the dictionary or whatever. or I ask.

2 minutes to check facts ^_~

 

[Jet Black]

What bothers me a little more than the insults and ad hominem attacks is the fact that a lot of people seem to be unwilling or unable learn.

exactly, whenever I see something new, I nearly always check google, or ask someone. It's powerfully simple and means that you can have a proper conversation, and learn new stuff at the same time. tis

 

[LorentzHA]

What bothers me a little more than the insults and ad hominem attacks is the fact that a lot of people seem to be unwilling or unable learn.

I borrowed my sister's biology book and skimmed through a couple of chapters on Evolution. I admit, I didn't understand it at first. Sometimes I have the feeling that I'm one of the only ones who looks stuff up. Whether in a science book or in the dictionary or whatever. or I ask.

2 minutes to check facts ^_~

I have a degree in Biology (undergrad) and thought I understood evolution until I got to this forum. I understand the basic mechanism, of course, but it is much more in depth than I ever dreamed. We would have a chapter here or there relating to it, like for example, how the Mitochondria was believed to have lived outside of the cell on its own early in the earth's history but evolution incorporated it into the cell as an organelle. Things like that. And of course we studied Darwin's basic premise-survival of the fittest and how those that survive will be able to produce children better able to survive. Most of my studies have been on the human cell as it is now and the human body in current form. That is why I love reading Lucaspa's posts. He brings up things I had no idea about and frankly had never even heard of. I am learning much from this man.

The other point you bring up, that I thought was excellent-that people are either "unable" or "unwilling" to learn. I would guess for most it is probably the latter. If they were to actually get into some deep study of a subject they might find that it conflicts with their belief system. They will do anything to avoid that situation even at the expense of staying in the dark and staying ignorant. I have no problem with people who do not know something. There is much I do not know but that is why I listen to people who do, like Lucaspa, Jet Black, etc. My problem is with people who do not even have a basic knowledge of Biology or Chemistry but are more than willing to debate it. It is very difficult to debate a part of science with someone who does not even know the basics enough to know how off base they are! They usually start with talking about the cell but do not even know about the cell, other than what they vaguely remember from 10th grade Biology. I have seen people in here argue DNA, but could not identify the Pyrmididines from the Purines in the DNA molecule-basic stuff. Then they go hop on to a web site for 5 minutes and come back and spew out a few terms that have very little, if anything to do with the topic and hand. I think the old saying is true, ignorance is bliss, but mixed with hubris can be a bad combination and an embarrasing situation..they do not seem to mind though.

 

[wblastyn]

I have a degree in Biology (undergrad) and thought I understood evolution until I got to this forum. I understand the basic mechanism, of course, but it is much more in depth than I ever dreamed. We would have a chapter here or there relating to it, like for example, how the Mitochondria was believed to have lived outside of the cell on its own early in the earth's history but evolution incorporated it into the cell as an organelle. Things like that. And of course we studied Darwin's basic premise-survival of the fittest and how those that survive will be able to produce children better able to survive. Most of my studies have been on the human cell as it is now and the human body in current form. That is why I love reading Lucaspa's posts. He brings up things I had no idea about and frankly had never even heard of. I am learning much from this man.

That is very true, I learn new things here every day from lucaspa, Jet Black and co.

I managed to get an A grade in my biology exam, which is more than I needed to be accepted into university in that particular exam, the essay was on evolution and I wrote some of the things I learnt here, so I know part of that is because of the people here who know a lot about evolution. Thankyou

The other point you bring up, that I thought was excellent-that people are either "unable" or "unwilling" to learn. I would guess for most it is probably the latter. If they were to actually get into some deep study of a subject they might find that it conflicts with their belief system. They will do anything to avoid that situation even at the expense of staying in the dark and staying ignorant. I have no problem with people who do not know something. There is much I do not know but that is why I listen to people who do, like Lucaspa, Jet Black, etc. My problem is with people who do not even have a basic knowledge of Biology or Chemistry but are more than willing to debate it...

This is also true. I would not dream of trampling into a computer programmer forum and telling them they're all stupid and wrong, when I know nothing about computer programming.

Some creationists seem to think they can knock over evolution very easily as if science is something simple and easy that even someone wno knows nothing about it can destroy it. I was overwhelmed by the amount of detail and complexity of the science we learnt in school, so I've no idea why they think even a layman can falsify evolution.

 

[Drotar]

Well, YEC doesn't say 6,000, actually I know of none that advocate that position.

Most say 10-12,000. If you check all the geneaologies, it'd be pretty impossible for the earth to be 6,000 years old.

 

[Arikay]

actually, quite a few creationist groups advocate a 6000 year old earth.

Some have pushed the date back because they just could not ignore some evidence after so long, however they seem to be rare.

An example, AIG supports a 6000 year old earth,

"AiG stands firmly on the authority of Scripture, which entails that Creation occurred in six normal-length days about 6000 years ago, and a planet-wide Flood followed about 1500 years later."
-AIG
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/compromise.asp

I do also find it interesting that AIG also partially admits that its believe is based on scripture and not actual science,

"P.S. Of course, AiG’s focus is promoting the truth and accuracy of the Bible. A ‘young’ Earth is the Biblical position; therefore that is the position we take."
-AIG
http://www.answersingenesis.org/canada/newsletters/0102lead.asp