Properties of Creationists

[BobbyJoeCool]

At this point, I would like to go on record and apologize for picking this thread in which to start this argument.

 

Yes, my original point was that what I thought to be creationism (which is what many of you have said is intellegent design) is a posibility. Not neseccarely a very probable one, but still a possibility. Just because it's my CURRENT belief (as there was a time when I was a true nutcase creationist), doesn't mean that I'm trying to prove it right, or get you to prove it wrong, just say that it's possible.

 

I wish I hand't posted in this thread now, because now I better understand what a creationist is (as I thought creationist meant some devine being created life. Nothing more), and felt like it was a personal attack on me, and other people like me. This created in me a desire to "fight back" and instead of biting my tongue like I should have, I said something, got into a debate, and proved, yet again, that I have a hard time controling my impulses.

 

When someone invents a time machine, tell me so I can go back in time and stop myself from looking like an idiot in this thread.

 

Again, my apologies.

[ydoaPs]

it is also a possibility that airplanes are held up by invisible pink fairys.

[JohnB]

Arguing that there is no final proof is a diversion. It has not been claimed that there is 'final proof', rather it is stated that there is a ggod deal of evidence, going back to the legal analogy, the forensic evidence is mounting and reasonal doubt is being eroded.

Not a diversion at all, simply that I view it as unreasonable to draw final conclusions from insufficient data.

 

When you have to make a choice between two belief systems the one with logic, reasoning and physical evidence should be given more respect than one which has none of those items.

Exactly, but "more respect" != "total respect" and "less respect != "no respect" and that is all I've been saying.

 

As I said much earlier, it is not the topic itself but the thought processes between the two sides that I find interesting. The debate doesn't have to be about abiogenesis, it could just as easily be about whether dinosaurs were grey and brown or brightly coloured like birds.

 

The point cannot be finally proven either way, so I find it interesting that opposite sides defend their conclusions so passionately. It's a very human thing and I find humans and their thoughts and opinions interesting.

 

[edit]Yourdad, are these fairies related to the little man in the fridge who turns the light on? [/edit]

[Zeth]

It's a very human thing and I find humans and their thoughts and opinions interesting. [/edit]

 

Evolution isn't an opinion it's a theory, backed by real world evidence. Creationism is an opinion backed by a book.

[-Demosthenes-]

Circles are cool.

[Sayonara]

Not a diversion at all, simply that I view it as unreasonable to draw final conclusions from insufficient data.

Then you must be delighted that there is far more than enough data to show evolution occurring on every scale.

[DQW]

Interesting new finds. Sorry if this has been talked about already :

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4708459.stm