RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register


Question: Fact to fact, face to face supporting science :: Total Votes:83
Poll choices Votes Statistics
I never discuss science v. creationism in public 11  [13.25%]
I occasionally discuss science v. creationism in public 60  [72.29%]
I seem to always discuss science v. creationism in public 12  [14.46%]
Guests cannot vote
Pages: (5) < 1 2 3 4 [5] >   
  Topic: Fact to fact, face to face supporting science, in daily life. Creationists do not reply< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2009,10:53   

Quote (k.e.. @ April 12 2009,10:32)
Shouldn't Creationism et al be just called a conservative reactionary political anti-fact identity movement.

Sort of a turd on the doorstep of reason.

You are correct of course, BUT....

You would have been on your way to glory and fame, if you would have adapted your thought to a Sig-Worthy phrase:

Creationism: A turd on the doorstop of reason.

k.e. 04/14/09

ps:  Your welcome! :)

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1692
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2009,12:22   

He could have done even more:

Conservative
Reactionary
Anti-fact
Political

identity movement

I'm just saying...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
FrankH



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: April 16 2009,13:24   

I have them all the time.

There are quite a few Creationists where I work and we almost always have some sort of conversation about politics, evolution, societal ills but they almost always come back to religion.

They know I'm agnostic and more than once I'll told someone that there very well could be a god or multiple gods but that I place little if any "faith" in their particular god.

One thing that has helped me is the little fact that many of the so called "literalists" themselves aren't literal about everything.  I was able to get the conversation away from Darwin and "scientists disagreeing with each other" and helped expand upon the differences between the Holy Rollers, Fundie Baptists, Evangelical Church of Christ and so forth.

By the time the dust settled, they were angrier at each other than me.  It seems that being "literal" is not as easy as they expected.  Each of them can't convince the other that their way is the "one true literal way".

Something else that has helped me is that most of them are pretty darn smart and if I give them information of where to find stuff on evolution like eyes, etc, they can read it and understand that there may be more than what they were told about the depth of study that goes into evolution.

--------------
Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

  
Peter Henderson



Posts: 298
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 19 2009,13:42   

Frank: You've had more success than I've had.

I worked in science for over thirty years (chemistry). Although I live in Norn Iron (the creo capital of the UK) I actually only ever worked with Atheists, Agnostics, nominal Christians, and one Baptist whose lifestyle left a lot to be desired. Confusius say " man with many girls on string soon get into tangle" springs to mind  ! So we never discussed creationism in work.

However, despite considering myself scientifically literate, I mistakingly joined in with the various discussion threads over on Premier Christian Radio's discussion forum. (I know, I'll have to get out of the house a bit more):

http://www.premiercommunity.org.uk/forum/topics/a-reply-to-creationist

It has all become very tedious and I feel I'm banging my head against a brick wall. However, a few things re-occur throughout the discussions;

(1) Christians who accept millions of years/evolution (i.e. mainstream science) aren't really Christians at all. In their heart of hearts this is what they really believe. They can't come out and say this because they know it's heresy.

(2) The evidence for YECism is exactly the same as mainstream science. it's just the interpretation that's different (i.e.biblical glasses and all that crap)

(3) The peer review process is nothing less than biast against creationists. The Royal Society, the Royal Institution etc. are nothing more than Atheistic organisations, blatently anti-Chrtistian.

(4) Science is entransigent against any new ideas. They (the YECs) consider themselves just like Galileo. Eventually YEC science will be mainstream science.

Anyway, here's were I worked until I retired a few years ago:

http://www.premier-power.co.uk/

You can see the laboratory in some of the photos.

  
  123 replies since April 07 2008,22:20 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (5) < 1 2 3 4 [5] >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]