Questions for Creationists (page 18)

Realist

thichi,

just curious...what facts change every 3 month?

ThiChi

Crazy151Drinker:

I cannot accept the implications. That would mean anyone with "strong" viewpoints can be suspect. Even those on the Evolution side. You have to look and the information.

I will not use this strategy as a way of discounting information. Let the information stand on its own or fall on its own.

In reality, REM, Gedanken, have my respect and I believe their sincerity of beliefs. I feel that there are many other viewpoints to consider, as history has shown that to be the case over and over.

"Klu Klux Klan are honest, non biased, full of scientific fact, and have nothing to do with racism."

It depends on what they have put forth as claims. Remember, there are still US Senators that still hold office that were once KKK members (think there are two left). Can we call them honest?

Edited by - thichi on 6 November 2002 17:49:19

Edited by - thichi on 6 November 2002 17:56:10

ThiChi

Realist:

This was an outrageous attempt at dramatization to explain the fact track record of Evolution, and the many aspects it entertains.

ros

Realist wrote:

a question...would you consider the idea that the world rests on a gigantic turtle as naive? i hope so!

"Naive" is not the word. Try "absurd". Sorry, nonsensical argument imo.
You also said:

well i am a geneticist...so i know what i am talking about.

So is Dr. Francis Collins. And from all indications, he is at a considerably higher ranking in notability than you. (He has been compared in one or two reports as on par with Einstein for our time.)

Regarding your questions about why a God would make things the way they are, couldn't the same questions be asked of macro-evolution?
I do have my opinions about it--but they are opinions. And in my opinion, my opinion makes more sense than that evolution made it the way it is. But if it makes you feel better to believe nothing made it that way (i.e., macro-evolution made it that way), then believe it that way. I don't try to convert atheists. I don't think God does either. (Btw, Dr. Francis Collins was once an atheist, too.)

ThiChi

ROS:

I like your style!

rem

Yeah, it does make me a bit uncomfortable when these discussions get sidetracked from Evolution/Special Creation to Theism/Atheism. I guess it's difficult to keep the concepts differentiated, but they are, indeed, separate.

There are many fantastic scientists who believe in god or gods. My choice not to believe in any gods really has nothing much to do with Evolution.

rem

Realist

ros,

tsk tsk tsk...more luck next time with a personal attack....

a) sorry that i have to burst your bubble but collins is NOT a creationist. so keep searching for a respected scientist who believes in your infantile fantasies.

b) to compare collins to einstein is sort of rediculous...but thats beside the point.

c) i congratulate collins to his believe in a personal christian god since it certainly gives him some comfort and inspiration (i wonder however why he chose that faith and how other for instance islamic, jewish, hindu scientists can justify their choice of religion if christianity is the only true one). anyway, if he finds he can combine the believe in a personal god he can pray to with observable facts than thats good for him...but is of course not based on facts.

e) i personally think it is plausible that the universe has a deeper meaning and that our physical laws as well as space-time are the result of a higher entity causing it. however, since there is no evidence for or against it i cannot put faith in it (although that thought might be comforting sometimes).

d) you should read john polkinghorne...you might gain some interesting ideas (his view of religion and god is close to what collins actually believes).

ThiChi

Cremo's response is now posted in the Friends Topic Area! Come get us, boys!

rem

Realist,

I think there might be some confusion with terms here. I think Ros' version of "Creationism" is that god started it but used evolution... maybe in some ID fashion. She is not a "Creationist" in the sense of Pomegranate and ThiChi. I'm not sure that she was suggesting that Collins is a creationist in the Fundy sense, just that he's a believer in god.

Ros, just a suggestion, I would refrain from using the word "Creationist" since it has a pretty established (pejorative) meaning. You might use "Intelligent Design" to describe your views, though I don't want to speak for you. I just think that it's difficult to have a discussion when different people have different definitions of "Creationist's".

Again, I don't think that anyone is suggesting that people who accept Evolution have to be atheists. "Creationism" implies special creation of all species at the same time on earth without the use of evolution by god.

rem

Zechariah

REM,

You continue to want to shape the debate about creation in a way you cannot lose.
Creationists have varying opinions about methods of creation which in some ways can include some form of evoluton or change.
The only thing that is of importance to debate is whether any of it could be possible without the design and direction of an all powerful intelligent being at its source.
Unless you or anybody else is saying the existence of the universe does not require such there is no argument and you could be termed a creationist. There is no reason that creationists must agree on the method. We'll never know the truth anyway.

Zechariah

Questions for Creationists

Share this