by cofty 6 Replies latest watchtower bible
Well they actually do cutting-edge research and publish peer-reviewed papers (well, reviewed by other creationists actually)
Here is a recent example by "Dr" Danny Faulkner on whether the flood lasted for 371 or 365 days....
You will always remember where you were when you first heard of this leap in human knowledge.
Spoiler alert - He concludes it doesn't matter either way. The Nobel Prize committee have been alerted!
What Do (Closet) Creationists do in their Laboratories?
re-create creation - or try to.
He doesn't even answer the question..... Was there a global flood? He just assumes that all readers believe there was.
Kate xx
So few creationist do a good job of providing intellectual thought to their arguments. I can understand that believing in intelligent design is a difficult position to hold, but they should make an attempt of postulating logical points for discussion.
I think the best they can do is ask questions, which in itself doesn't prove creationist viewpoints but it does spur reasonable conversation.
The complexity argument is one they use. Richard Dawkins addresses that one, though I don't think his argument is that strong.
The two questions I would ask if I was a creationist, is why doesn't abiogenesis and endosymbiosis happen today?
Again, a lack of information doesn't prove God, but it is much better discussion than their pseudoscience approach.
The fundamental problem with creationist / religious science is that instead of looking for the answers based on the evidence they instead look for the evidence to support the answer they already think they have.
They then twist and ignore anything that contradicts their pre-decided truth which is never going to produce anything of value.
It's the "science" equivalent of Bush's Iraq War / WoMD evidence. We know what a success that was.
Simon nailed it.
simple as that.
