Why wont creationists participate in open and honest debate?

AnEmpiricalAgnostic · Oct 14, 2006

I’ve gotten every excuse from “I don’t have time” (even though they are here every day) to prophesizing about how their opponent will conduct themselves (even though they have never tried). Since every reason they give, from A to Z is obviously false then what could the real reason be? The only difference is that they are going to be held accountable for backing up their claims and can’t run away. Is that enough to bring the entire creationist argument to it’s knees?

Biologist · Oct 14, 2006

Is that enough to being the entire creationist argument to it’s knees?

Every honest debate I've participated in has brought creationism to it's knees(along with every public debate between Scientist and creation "scientist"). On this site any posts that bring the creationist's argument to their knee are ignored. And when the Evolution supporters win in a way they can't be ignored. 5,4,3,2,1....Countdown to the same creationist argument the next day, as if the one thread before didn't exist.

Allister · Oct 14, 2006

that is becuase you cannot destroy faith.

rmwilliamsll · Oct 14, 2006

I think it is unfair of you to impose your standards of scientific truthfulness on the YEC community. It is a religious community, those YECists here are not interested in science or in the facts about the universe, nor are they interested in learning how to discover and understand these things. They are here primarily to preach and do apologetics for their religious beliefs. Any reference to science is just that a passing reference done in order to placate those here to talk about the relationship of science to religious belief.

You are trying to impose on them a different epistemology and way of understanding the world. Their way is to filter everything through a specific community's worldview which claims to completely correspond to God's POV. Since this POV is by definition correct there is no reason to try to alter any component of their worldview because they know apriori that it is true and complete and doesn't need any revision. Debates by their very nature require listening to the other side and trying in a sympathetic view to understand not just the words but the big ideas and the driving emotional forces behind your opponent's position. But YECists know that Satan himself is behind all opposition to them, therefore to understand or even worse sympathize with other-than-YECists is to concede something to the evil one and on moral grounds alone this is unacceptable.

So i hope you see why those YECists who post here can not in good conscience accept any variation on their crusade to bring truth and enlightenment to those held in darkness and falsity, those who disagree with them and their God. They must be single minded and preach the Gospel of YECism as loudly and as persistently as they can, debates will just get in the way of this fundamental and important task. Just like the facts themselves do, thus requiring the exercise of a greater amount of blind faith to counteract them.

So please excuse XXXX from the debate, he is busy doing my work of preaching and doesn't have time for extraneous endeavors---God.

mark kennedy · Oct 14, 2006

If you are talking about the formal debate area I have been looking for someone who would have a serious formal debate since it opened. See you in the invitation area.

JohnR7 · Oct 14, 2006

Biologist said:
Every honest debate I've participated in has brought creationism to it's knees

So you have never participated in a honest debate?

JohnR7 · Oct 14, 2006

AnEmpiricalAgnostic said:
Why wont creationists participate in open and honest debate?

What do you want to debate?

mark kennedy · Oct 14, 2006

rmwilliamsll said:
I think it is unfair of you to impose your standards of scientific truthfulness on the YEC community. It is a religious community, those YECists here are not interested in science or in the facts about the universe, nor are they interested in learning how to discover and understand these things. They are here primarily to preach and do apologetics for their religious beliefs. Any reference to science is just that a passing reference done in order to placate those here to talk about the relationship of science to religious belief.

I would be delighted to defend creationist exclusivly on it's scientific merits. I am interested in standards of scientific truthfullness and the latest lie I exposed was Time's article that everyone thought was so accurate even though what they were saying was conclusivly proven false in a definitive publication.

Biologist · Oct 14, 2006

What do you want to debate?

The occurance of benificial mutations that also add information to the genome.

AnEmpiricalAgnostic · Oct 14, 2006

rmwilliamsll said:
I think it is unfair of you to impose your standards of scientific truthfulness on the YEC community

To be honest I dont care what people believe. I only impose my standards for knowledge and truth on myself. What we are dealing with here is the wayward theist charging into sciences sandbox and declaring a scientific theory false. If they are going to rail against science then they have to rise up to sciences standards. If they want to avoid the burden of scientific evidence then they should stay away from making assertions about science.

AnEmpiricalAgnostic · Oct 14, 2006

mark kennedy said:
If you are talking about the formal debate area I have been looking for someone who would have a serious formal debate since it opened. See you in the invitation area.

Thanks mark but I have no beef with you. You seem to have a decent grasp on the TofE and actually substantiate most of your claims. Im interested in dealing with the participants that keep throwing around assertions claiming that they have scientific evidence but never posting it. Most of the places you go in your debates are too technical for me as I am not a biologist. I would be interested in participating in a team based formal debate so I could get a few more knowledgeable participants to help me out with the details though. Let me know if your interested in that and Ill see if I can get a team together. That would be fun.

AnEmpiricalAgnostic · Oct 14, 2006

JohnR7 said:
What do you want to debate?

Whatever you have the most scientific evidence for that you think refutes the TofE.

joey444 · Oct 14, 2006

And the bible isn't scientific because it tells you to wash your clothes, John.

mark kennedy · Oct 14, 2006

AnEmpiricalAgnostic said:
Thanks mark but I have no beef with you. You seem to have a decent grasp on the TofE and actually substantiate most of your claims. Im interested in dealing with the participants that keep throwing around assertions claiming that they have scientific evidence but never posting it. Most of the places you go in your debates are too technical for me as I am not a biologist. I would be interested in participating in a team based formal debate so I could get a few more knowledgeable participants to help me out with the details though. Let me know if your interested in that and Ill see if I can get a team together. That would be fun.

No problem then, there are a couple of pretty good scientists that come on here. Personally, I am more comfortable with working through the scientific literature myself so you would probably just be debating me. If you wanted to include statements or technical discussions from people you consider more knowledgable I would have no problem with it. You could just quote them when they address particular points as long as the actual debate was with you and not them.

We can work out the details in the invitation thread.

Carico · Oct 14, 2006

AnEmpiricalAgnostic said:
Ive gotten every excuse from I dont have time (even though they are here every day) to prophesizing about how their opponent will conduct themselves (even though they have never tried). Since every reason they give, from A to Z is obviously false then what could the real reason be? The only difference is that they are going to be held accountable for backing up their claims and cant run away. Is that enough to being the entire creationist argument to its knees?

We are debating here. And the responses from evolutionists here are not honest. They contradict themselves at every turnm like saying that humans came from non-human apes, then they say they came from human apes. And since they aren't capable of seeing their own contradictions, then they aren't capable of honest debate. So they can thank monkeys for their lives and see where that gets them for eternity. I'm afraid that's the only way they're going to learn the truth.

TheInstant · Oct 14, 2006

Carico said:
They contradict themselves at every turnm like saying that humans came from non-human apes, then they say they came from human apes.

Humans as a species evolved from non-human apes. But every person alive today was born from a human ape. So these statements are not contradicory, it depends on the context they are made in.

Aron-Ra · Oct 14, 2006

Carico said:
We are debating here. And the responses from evolutionists here are not honest. They contradict themselves at every turnm like saying that humans came from non-human apes, then they say they came from human apes. And since they aren't capable of seeing their own contradictions, then they aren't capable of honest debate. So they can thank monkeys for their lives and see where that gets them for eternity. I'm afraid that's the only way they're going to learn the truth.

Human ape = humans; Homoines, a specific subset of apes (Hominoids).
Non-human ape = any other member of the taxonomic superfamily, Hominoidea besides homoines.

Where do you see a contradiction?

Elduran · Oct 14, 2006

Carico said:
We are debating here.

No, debating is when you present evidence and rationally use it to support your position, carefully countering the opponent's arguments. What you're doing is preaching, and any counter arguments you make are usually to things that your opponents don't actually support. Good job!

And the responses from evolutionists here are not honest. They contradict themselves at every turnm

Anyone else laughing at the irony in this statement?

like saying that humans came from non-human apes, then they say they came from human apes.

Yeah, that "not honest" bit is what evolutionists do... never you </sarcasm>

And since they aren't capable of seeing their own contradictions, then they aren't capable of honest debate.

Yep, insult the opponents because you can't deal with their real arguments. Good job.

So they can thank monkeys for their lives and see where that gets them for eternity. I'm afraid that's the only way they're going to learn the truth.

I don't thank anyone for my life, though I'm somewhat glad my parents got together and decided to have kids.

And I'm really not worried about any afterlife that may or may not happen. As with life, I'll play things as they happen rather than worrying about it constantly

Oncedeceived · Oct 15, 2006

AnEmpiricalAgnostic said:
Ive gotten every excuse from I dont have time (even though they are here every day) to prophesizing about how their opponent will conduct themselves (even though they have never tried). Since every reason they give, from A to Z is obviously false then what could the real reason be? The only difference is that they are going to be held accountable for backing up their claims and cant run away. Is that enough to being the entire creationist argument to its knees?

You asked specific creationists rather than all creationists here. So perhaps you should say, "specific creationists gave excuses".

Oncedeceived · Oct 15, 2006

Happy birthday Aron-RA.

Why wont creationists participate in open and honest debate?

Agnostic by Fact, Atheist by Epiphany

Regular Member

Veteran

avid reader

Natura non facit saltum

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Natura non facit saltum

Regular Member

Agnostic by Fact, Atheist by Epiphany

Agnostic by Fact, Atheist by Epiphany

Agnostic by Fact, Atheist by Epiphany

Active Member

Natura non facit saltum

Well-Known Member

Hooraytheist

Senior Veteran

Disruptive influence

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency

Why wont creationists participate in open and honest debate?