Dishonest Creationist Tactics= Bad Religion

reply to post by daskakik


I noticed an intentionaly vauge claim about the evidence supporting evolution to dishonestly convince an ignorant reader of a non-existant flaw. Also an attempt to change the subject to prevent further discussion of the embarrasing behavior of creationists.

It's funny...

Evolution is a theory.. but yet, because it's based in science it apparently has more validity and people actually take it as FACT. I don't want to mention the amount of theories that have come and gone over the years that have been based on the science of their time.

Science is fluid, things change and theories disproved. I accept science has a great role to play, and i truly believe it can tell us a LOT about this world and beyond. But it can't tell us everything. So for people to try and fill in the blanks is only natural. We want to KNOW... and waiting for science who may or may not give us a straight answer is dull.......

Why can't people just stop trying to prove each other wrong? If science proves intelligent design to be wrong (which i don't see happening) I 100% guarantee that many of those who bash "IDers" will see this more of a mocking opportunity than the opportunity for truth.

reply to post by MrConspiracy


Here's another dishonest debate tactic creationists use "its just a theory".

www.notjustatheory.com...

In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations.2 It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.

"Why can't people just stop trying to prove each other wrong?"

Religion has and will always be the aggressor. Expecting intelligent people to just let religious belief founded on ignorance and delusion to control our society without resistance is idiotic and dangerous.

MrConspiracy
It's funny...

Evolution is a theory.. but yet, because it's based in science it apparently has more validity and people actually take it as FACT. I don't want to mention the amount of theories that have come and gone over the years that have been based on the science of their time.

It's funny how people keep repeating this. Evolution has been established as fact for a very long time.

Science is fluid, things change and theories disproved. I accept science has a great role to play, and i truly believe it can tell us a LOT about this world and beyond. But it can't tell us everything. So for people to try and fill in the blanks is only natural. We want to KNOW... and waiting for science who may or may not give us a straight answer is dull.......

Science is fluid, that is right. It's not science if it doesn't accept and adapt to new information. Science by nature is always looking for faults within itself. It doesn't tell us everything but it does tell us more than any belief system does. Belies systems provide 0 answers and just say that some guy did. No evidence required of course.

Why can't people just stop trying to prove each other wrong? If science proves intelligent design to be wrong (which i don't see happening) I 100% guarantee that many of those who bash "IDers" will see this more of a mocking opportunity than the opportunity for truth.

ID theory is just the same as belief systems. If you dont have the answer they say it was supernatural forces. There's nothing to disprove in ID since it doesn't provide any evidence to argue.

Wertdagf
reply to post by MrConspiracy

 

Here's another dishonest debate tactic creationists use "its just a theory".

www.notjustatheory.com...

In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations.2 It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.

"Why can't people just stop trying to prove each other wrong?"

Religion has and will always be the aggressor. Expecting intelligent people to just let religious belief founded on ignorance and delusion to control our society without resistance is idiotic and dangerous.

edit on 16-9-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)

Are you suggesting i'm a "tactic creationist" ? If so.. that's ok. You can.

1) Macro evolution is just a theory. I'm not saying it's wrong. But i'm also not saying it's solid.

2) I never laid blame on who the "aggressor" was. You did that. And i know a great deal of religious people who are extremely interested and knowledgeable about science. But yet still have faith in something after this life.

The problem is, people square the two off against each other. As if to suggest the two couldn't both have elements of truth. That... is ignorance.

PsykoOps

MrConspiracy
It's funny...

Evolution is a theory.. but yet, because it's based in science it apparently has more validity and people actually take it as FACT. I don't want to mention the amount of theories that have come and gone over the years that have been based on the science of their time.

It's funny how people keep repeating this. Evolution has been established as fact for a very long time.

Science is fluid, things change and theories disproved. I accept science has a great role to play, and i truly believe it can tell us a LOT about this world and beyond. But it can't tell us everything. So for people to try and fill in the blanks is only natural. We want to KNOW... and waiting for science who may or may not give us a straight answer is dull.......

Science is fluid, that is right. It's not science if it doesn't accept and adapt to new information. Science by nature is always looking for faults within itself. It doesn't tell us everything but it does tell us more than any belief system does. Belies systems provide 0 answers and just say that some guy did. No evidence required of course.

Why can't people just stop trying to prove each other wrong? If science proves intelligent design to be wrong (which i don't see happening) I 100% guarantee that many of those who bash "IDers" will see this more of a mocking opportunity than the opportunity for truth.

ID theory is just the same as belief systems. If you dont have the answer they say it was supernatural forces. There's nothing to disprove in ID since it doesn't provide any evidence to argue.

1) Evolution is proven fact? This this new to me.

2) I'm glad we both agree science is fluid. Therefore susceptible to change. Who's to say in 500 years everything people believe today isn't just another "flat earth" joke. - Although, i'll give science credit, it's forever growing and forever becoming more impressive. It's exciting!

3) You say "if you don't have the answer they say it was supernatural" The problem is here is... where is the answer? Are we expected to wait for 'science' to give us it? The issue is... and it's a big one. Science will never know everything.. and guess what, neither will any belief system.

The word you need to focus on is faith. I have faith, therefore i don't see anything wrong with suggesting some kind of life after death, or intelligent design. For me, looking at the world and heck, even the universe, is enough for me to suggest there is a lot more to this life then we will ever be aware of. Do you see it that way? Maybe not. But we have different eyes, so we might interpret things differently, and i'm ok with that... are you?

reply to post by flyingfish


I'm pretty sure you got the exact message I was sending.

MrConspiracy
1) Evolution is proven fact? This this new to me.

Peer reviewed independently verified many times over. Fact.

3) You say "if you don't have the answer they say it was supernatural" The problem is here is... where is the answer? Are we expected to wait for 'science' to give us it? The issue is... and it's a big one. Science will never know everything.. and guess what, neither will any belief system.

Well if had all the answers to everything we wouldn't need science would we? Belief systems dont work by knowing something. Knowing and believing are not the same thing.

Do you see it that way? Maybe not. But we have different eyes, so we might interpret things differently, and i'm ok with that... are you?

That's the beaty of science. How I see and how you see is irrelevant.

MrConspiracy
It's funny...

Evolution is a theory.. but yet, because it's based in science it apparently has more validity and people actually take it as FACT.

Its funny...

Gravity is a Theory.. but yet because it's based in science it apparently has more validity and people actually take it as FACT


OMG IM FLOATING OFF THE EARTH BECAUSE GRAVITY IS JUST A THEORY!!!

luciddream

MrConspiracy
It's funny...

Evolution is a theory.. but yet, because it's based in science it apparently has more validity and people actually take it as FACT.

Its funny...

Gravity is a Theory.. but yet because it's based in science it apparently has more validity and people actually take it as FACT


OMG IM FLOATING OFF THE EARTH BECAUSE GRAVITY IS JUST A THEORY!!!

Well quickly get help or else you'll be classed as a UFO before long!!!

Anyway... there's a difference isn't there?

I just dropped something - GRAVITY
I am alive - Evolution? Not that simple.

PsykoOps

MrConspiracy
1) Evolution is proven fact? This this new to me.

Peer reviewed independently verified many times over. Fact.

3) You say "if you don't have the answer they say it was supernatural" The problem is here is... where is the answer? Are we expected to wait for 'science' to give us it? The issue is... and it's a big one. Science will never know everything.. and guess what, neither will any belief system.

Well if had all the answers to everything we wouldn't need science would we? Belief systems dont work by knowing something. Knowing and believing are not the same thing.

Do you see it that way? Maybe not. But we have different eyes, so we might interpret things differently, and i'm ok with that... are you?

That's the beaty of science. How I see and how you see is irrelevant.

Find me somewhere that shows macro evolution has been conclusively proven. Then you can call it fact. Until then, it's just a theory. A logical one, to an extent. But not 100% fact. Anyway... that's just going to go back and forth until someone gets bored.

Believing and knowing ARE different. Yes. That's why i mentioned faith. I didn't suggest they were the same.

Not true. I see everything around me and see an amazing world/universe that boggles the mind and that we know SO LITTLE about... but yet there's a lot of people here that are so arrogant to suggest they know the origins of life...... It goes beyond this world. It goes beyond our egotistical race.

I personally believe there is more to this "life" than what science can tell us. That's mine, and many, maaaany people's opinion. And i think, personally, it's quite logical. Try make peace with it or you'll go insaaaaaaaaaaane.

It would seem i am in the minority on this post. I'm ok with that but......

guys.... come on!! go easy on me!

randyvs
reply to post by flyingfish

 

I'm pretty sure you got the exact message I was sending.

Yes I see, bad religion is a bit of an oxymoron, but I'm being very specific when it comes to creationism and how it's tactics can be harmful to Christians. The fact is that creationism is so blatantly false that it's only survival is to distort, ignore, or outright lie about the scientific facts.
By their efforts, creationists are strengthening the belief that religion is backward and irrational, and have hampered the efforts of forward-looking Christians who want to bring their faith into the present.

Anyway here's a video for you, it's a bit long but stick with it, it gets better towards the end.

Klassified
Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't evolution address origins of species? It has nothing to do with the origins of life. That's a totally different topic. Now abiogenesis vs. creationism would make more sense.

There are plenty of creationists who believe evolution is the process god used to create life.

edit on 9/15/2013 by Klassified because: spelling

edit on 9/15/2013 by Klassified because: clarity

Exactly this. I was going to comment that I do not believe "creationism" and evolution are opposing and mutually exclusive concepts.

Believing in some kind of higher power, or guiding/driving intelligence, myself, I can easily see how evolution could be a tool of god. It's a shame that not every religious-minded person can see this as easily as myself.


I think much of the argument, and what the OP is talking about arises from the practice of biblical literalism. It is biblical literalists who try to claim that the earth is 6,000 years old and the concept of evolution is an affront to god. And IMHO those interested in debating creation should learn to recognize and distinguish this group.

reply to post by MrConspiracy


I hate doing this but anyway:

The term "macroevolution" frequently arises within the context of the evolution/creation debate, usually used by creationists alleging a significant difference between the evolutionary changes observed in field and laboratory studies and the larger scale macroevolutionary changes that scientists believe to have taken thousands or millions of years to occur. They accept that evolutionary change is possible within what they call "kinds" ("microevolution"), but deny that one "kind" can evolve into another ("macroevolution"). [13] Contrary to this belief among the anti-evolution movement proponents, evolution of life forms beyond the species level (i.e. speciation) has indeed been observed multiple times under both controlled laboratory conditions and in nature.[14]

Such claims are rejected by the scientific community on the basis of ample evidence that macroevolution is an active process both presently and in the past.[6][16] The terms macroevolution and microevolution relate to the same processes operating at different scales, but creationist claims misuse the terms in a vaguely defined way which does not accurately reflect scientific usage, acknowledging well observed evolution as "microevolution" and denying that "macroevolution" takes place

Wiki

reply to post by flyingfish

On Topic:

OP, I think what you have to realize about creationists is, they are coming from a completely different perspective than you or I. Having been a literalist, and a fundamentalist, at one time. I can tell you that science is never going to convince any literalist Christian of anything that is contrary to scripture.

From their perspective, science, while having its place in society, is still a tool of the Devil, and is used by him to deceive the masses. You also have to realize these people have had an experience with the supernatural that convinces them God, Jesus, and Devil are real entities. It doesn't matter to them what we think of their experience. For them, it was enough to convince them.

You are dealing with a belief system that does not allow for variables. "Biblical Christianity" only allows for constants. You either believe God, and his "written word", or you do not. If you do not, you are not a Christian.

To the dishonesty part. I think you will find, the vast majority of Christians to be honest in their mindset. What you may see as dishonesty, is to them, biblical perspective. If it is written in scripture. It is fact. So while they may not know or understand the full theory of Evolution. It isn't their intention to be dishonest while defending their faith.

That's not to say there aren't dishonest creationists out there. Of course there are. But I think you will find that many of them have an agenda, and are in leadership positions. Though I know they have trained underlings to spew the same trash.

Christianity is more than a belief system. It is a complete lifestyle. It is something you live your life by, and base all of your decisions on. There is no gray area.

PsykoOps
reply to post by MrConspiracy

 

I hate doing this but anyway:

The term "macroevolution" frequently arises within the context of the evolution/creation debate, usually used by creationists alleging a significant difference between the evolutionary changes observed in field and laboratory studies and the larger scale macroevolutionary changes that scientists believe to have taken thousands or millions of years to occur. They accept that evolutionary change is possible within what they call "kinds" ("microevolution"), but deny that one "kind" can evolve into another ("macroevolution"). [13] Contrary to this belief among the anti-evolution movement proponents, evolution of life forms beyond the species level (i.e. speciation) has indeed been observed multiple times under both controlled laboratory conditions and in nature.[14]

Such claims are rejected by the scientific community on the basis of ample evidence that macroevolution is an active process both presently and in the past.[6][16] The terms macroevolution and microevolution relate to the same processes operating at different scales, but creationist claims misuse the terms in a vaguely defined way which does not accurately reflect scientific usage, acknowledging well observed evolution as "microevolution" and denying that "macroevolution" takes place

Wiki

Hate doing what? You've shown me a bit of wiki that i've read before. It doesn't show me proof. It's just reiterating the same old "macro evolution is just micro evolution over a longer period of time" Once again... that's speculation.

reply to post by flyingfish


i could not agree more with you.

creationists/christers are arrogant beyond belief. i have yet to see any other religion make such outrageous claims. you never see hindus or taoists claiming science is wrong just because their holy book says so.

i despise they way they misuse terms, like macro and micro evolution.

i look down on them for ignoring all evidence presented to them.

but what really gets my goat, is they have absolutely no evidence to back up their claims. they have no evidence that animals just "popped" into existence complete and whole. they have nothing, yet look down on the mounds of evidence supporting evolution.

willful ignorance must be the greatest of all sins.

reply to post by MrConspiracy


you dont know what theory means. how cute.

see, you gather together a bunch of facts, then you form a theory to explain these facts.

a theory can never be a fact, it is only an explanation of the facts presented at the time. when new facts come along and changes the picture, then the theory to explain these facts must also change.

think of it this way. you have a bunch of puzzle pieces. these are facts. you put them together, but are missing quite a bit, so you do your best to explain what the picture is based on the info you have. you see a mess of hair, like a pony's tail, so your theory is that the picture is of a horse. then you get new pieces that show stripes, so you change your theory to say its a zebra. this is a never ending process.

and that is the difference between a fact and a theory.

reply to post by flyingfish


Excellent post FF . . . S&F for you.

I was going to post a thread that covered this topic a few days ago, based on some comments in the thread about the Nephilim skulls. Unfortunately, real life called and I couldn't visit the site until now. Since you have broached the topic, I'll post some specific info about their dishonesty here.

The first link I'm going to provide is a document by the Discovery Institute. For those that don't know who they are, the Discovery Institute is the leading force behind the current ID movement and really became aggressive in their tactics shortly after the Supreme Court ruled that Creationism is not science and cannot be presented to HS/Jr. High students in science class. They have a clear evangelical agenda and have actively been recruiting religious "scientists" in an effort to give legitimacy to their claims.

Discovery Institute is an inter-disciplinary community of scholars and policy advocates dedicated to the reinvigoration of traditional Western principles and institutions and the worldview from which they issued. Discovery Institute has a special concern for the role that science and technology play in our culture and how they can advance free markets, illuminate public policy and support the theistic foundations of the West.

Discovery Institute

Here is a short YouTube video on some of their dishonest tactics that was used as evidence in the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial.


In that trial, their dishonest agenda was brought to light by exposing their "manifesto", if you will. This document has been dubbed the Wedge Document, based on the title. It clearly outlines how they will force creationism/ID into the realm of legitmate science by manipulating public opinion on this issue. This would be accomplished by recruiting science professionals sympathetic to their cause (such as Michael Behe), lobbying politicians sympathetic to their cause (such as Rick Santorum), giving presentations at churches/youth rallies, lobbying media outlets to run their material and interviewing their fellows.

Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for a broadly theistic understanding of nature. The Center awards fellowships for original research, holds conferences, and briefs policymakers about the opportunities for life after materialism.

The Wedge Document .pdf

Which brings us to their crowning glory in the media . . .

The Discovery Institute and their media and marketing arms, Premise Media and Motive Marketing, produced the oft used (by proponents on this site) "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" where they claim there is a global conspiracy to silence creation scientists. While there are very few, if any, truths contained in this film, it was a "godsend" to their targeted audience . . . America's Christian community. Please visit the link below to see how twisted the facts become to promote their agenda.

Welcome to Expelled Exposed, a detailed look at the Ben Stein movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. We'll show you why this movie is not a documentary at all, but anti-science propaganda aimed at creating the appearance of controversy where there is none.

Expelled Exposed

I was supposed to view an advanced screening in Tempe, AZ, back in April 2008. I was sent an email stating the screening rescheduled to a different time, followed by another stating it was cancelled. However, this is not true . . . it still showed. What did happen is that Motive Marketing began to screen the attendees and knowing lie to those that they thought would be critical of the movie. When I called my contact from Motive, to inquire about the showing, they first asked what church group I was associated with. I told them I was not with a church group, but simply signed up on their website. I was then told that the screening was cancelled due to lack of interest. Here are a couple of links to a blogger's experience who was also supposed to attend but was given the same story . . . plus commenters to his blog that did still attend.

Received an e-mail this morning notifying me (and five others) that the Tempe screening has been canceled. Interesting thing is that the original mailing I received had a further 15 names on it. In addition, “boughtbythecross,” “homeschoolma,” and “covenant-dad” were not CCed on the e-mail I received today. Interesting.

John Lynch - Science Blog

I just called the Arizona Mills Harkins theater and said that I had heard that the private screening of Expelled had been moved from 7:00 to 6:00 (I didn’t mention that I had been emailed that the showing was canceled). The person I spoke to confirmed that the movie is showing today at 6:00. Clearly the promoters are somehow screening the attendees and then sending out cancellation notices to the "undesirables."

John Lynch - Science Blog

Liars and charlatans all . . .