Beautifully put Swordsbane.

It boggles the mind that these fundies feel so threatened by a theory that they feel has so many holes in it that it is quite useless, yet they seem so frantic in their attempts to disprove it.

The same argument can be and is used against us (people frantically debunking creationism).

We would not be able to use it to build our view of he world nor derive any practical benefit to society out of it.  To be useful, a theory has to have practical applications or be able to be part of something that has practical applications in some kind of process.  If evolution is bunk, then you would not be able to use any of the conclusions in the theory in any practical applications in the real world.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------snip------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The concepts found in evolution on the other hand are used in practical applications in medicine and treatment of illnesses.  They have been used for quite some time in the breeding of horses and dogs and cats.  If our theories were wrong, then those treatments and those medicines would not work, and we wouldn’t have on the one hand dogs that look like small ponies and small dogs that look like they were hit in the face with a shovel.* But we do have those animals, and those medical treatments and medicines DO work.

They simply do not accept that evolution has any practical applications or uses. Hard to argue against blind faith.

There are none so blind as those who will not see

The same argument can be and is used against us (people frantically debunking creationism).

The operative word is “frantically.” It doesn’t take much to debunk creationist explanations of cosmology or speciation. On the other hand, attempting to debunk evolution entails colossal, unfounded leaps of faith that I can only suspect lead to frustration and cognitive dissonance among the more intelligent creationists.

There are none so blind as those who will not see

......somewhere in the bible (I think)

It’s also from “I Know You’re Out There Somewhere” by The Moody Blues. 

It boggles the mind that these fundies feel so threatened by a theory that they feel has so many holes in it that it is quite useless, yet they seem so frantic in their attempts to disprove it.

The same argument can be and is used against us (people frantically debunking creationism).

Science only threatens lies, and anyway I’m not trying to tell schools which science to teach and which to not teach.

I can handle blind faith.  If they came at me saying “This is what I believe and I reject evolution” then I wouldn’t presume to debate them.  Unfortunately THEY decided that they could play by the rules of science to debunk something that science accepts.  I don’t try to support evolution by using their scriptures.  They try to get creationism taught AS science.  That is not only wrong, that’s dishonest and insulting.

We also wouldn’t have the platypus unless God smokes crack.

Yes Les- What the fuck were you thinking- you had some left over bits or something?

Sword: That is not only wrong, that’s dishonest and insulting.

But it’s by lying that Extreme Theists spread their disease.
Insulting? They’re so used to dealing with the not very bright [no pun intended] they forget there are people who can detect bullshit quite easily.
Even Ken Miller gives a coupla examples where Fundies lied during a trial he was a witnessed at.

SS:

The operative word is “frantically.” It doesn’t take much to debunk creationist explanations of cosmology or speciation. On the other hand, attempting to debunk evolution entails colossal, unfounded leaps of faith that I can only suspect lead to frustration and cognitive dissonance among the more intelligent creationists.

swordsbane:

Science only threatens lies, and anyway I’m not trying to tell schools which science to teach and which to not teach.

You are both correct however that’s not the way that fundies see it. They actually honestly believe that the science supports them. It’s the scientists who they think are perverting science for their own ends. You have to realize how little they understand evolution. Remember they make statements like “Evolution contradicts the orbit of Venus” and “How do evolutionist explain [some phenomenon] about Jupiter”

I wasn’t trying to defend Missler; I was trying to explain (kinda) how fundies think (kinda). They DO see scientists as satanists is lab-coats frantically running to-and-fro trying to disprove (we would say debunk) creationism so that the atheists can get back to unworriedly leading our sinful, godless, heathen and hedonic lifestyles. And they DO ask why we spend so much time arguing against religion/gods (it has happened on this blog more than once) and defending evolution if their theory has so many holes.

And remember that they see any attack on any aspect of their faith as a personal attack.

Again I’m not defending them; I’m just saying that your arguments, valid though they are, are pretty useless when used on them.

JulianP, you are right.  To communicate, we need to try to understand.  This is at the core of Mooney & Nisbett’s “framing” paper and the whole kerfluffle on ScienceBlogs that followed.

They actually honestly believe that the science supports them. It’s the scientists who they think are perverting science for their own ends.

Most are true believers, but I think most of the ‘regulars’ at the top have some kind of inkling that they’re wrong, if they don’t know full well.  The believers stick to the science trying to find an answer that supports their ‘theory’.  But the ones that changed Creationism into Intelligent design, the ones that avoid public scientific debate on the subject, the ones that concentrate on targeting parents with their propaganda so they put pressure on the school boards to bypass any significant debate on the subject, the ones who lie and say that “even scientists don’t really believe in evolution” Those are the one’s who know exactly what they’re doing, like the TV evangelist who preaches simple faith in Jeezuss and how humble before God he is when he drives the most tasteless, gaudy Rolls Royce or Caddy and lives in a mansion.  Innocent faith doesn’t hide.  It might be blind, it might be unconvinced by the facts and stubbornly refuse to let go of it’s pre-convieved notions and prejudice, but it doesn’t avoid the confrontation and try to cheat to win.

I like most Christians.  Many of my friends are Christians.  None of them believe in creationism or Intelligent Design and even they notice that something is ‘fishy’ at the top.  Did you ever notice that eventually, the true believers always refer to one of their leaders when you back them into a corner?  “Well, so and so already has the arguments that refute what you say.” and then they refer you to a web site or a book that has stuff in it that has already been found to be bogus.  When they stop refering you up the food chain and start saying things like “Scientists don’t believe” or “Darwin was an ID proponent” or engage in personal attacks instead of bringing up facts, they stop attacking the science and start attacking the scientists.  Those are the people I have no respect for.  If they have half the brains they claim to have, they already know that what they say is false even before they open their mouths, but what they’re saying isn’t aimed at convincing smart people to believe in ID.  It’s aimed at naive people so they will begin to distrust what science tells them, so they stop listening to silly things like facts and simply accept what they are told by ID proponents.  Trusting the source goes a long way.

I look at your photos and read your words and it is very clear that it would be a waste of time to try to rationalize with you. But maybe you should research more the inconsistancies of the theory of evolution and just how many scientists have gone out in search of proving the theory of Creation wrong. Then find there is NO WAY evolution could possible to true.

I look at your photos and read your words and it is very clear that it would be a waste of time to try to rationalize with you. But maybe you should research more the inconsistancies of the theory of evolution and just how many scientists have gone out in search of proving the theory of Creation wrong. Then find there is NO WAY evolution could possible to true.

[DarthVader voice] The stupid is strong with this one! [/DarthVader voice]

I look at your photos and read your words and it is very clear that it would be a waste of time to try to rationalize with you. But maybe you should research more the inconsistencies of the theory of evolution and just how many scientists have gone out in search of proving the theory of Creation wrong. Then find there is NO WAY evolution could possible to true.

Have a look at what you said and replace Creation with Evolution and Evolution with Creation. It’ll make a lot more RATIONAL sense.
Hang on – I’ll do some magic for you:

I look at your photos and read your words and it is very clear that it would be a waste of time to try to rationalize with you. But maybe you should research more the inconsistencies of the theory of CREATION and just how many scientists have gone out in search of proving the theory of EVOLUTION wrong. Then find there is NO WAY CREATION could possible to true.

Voila!! Pretty clever aren’t I?
See how it makes much more sense?

Karen, have you been listening to those pesky pastors, priests and padres again.
You know they only tell you lies to keep you enslaved so you’ll keep coming back so you’ll give them money.
You know none of those bastards would work in an Iron lung.
Haven’t you seen thru their scam yet?

Click on this and have a listen to this bloke.
He’s a Christian and a Professor of Biology WITH a PhD - that means he knows stuff – probably knows more stuff than your priest.

Speaking of creationist “reasoning"- a Google ad on this page of SEB sent me to Creation or Evolution, where I was treated to a video with cheerful music and a voiceover saying: “If you think there’s any proof that this monkey is your relative...” And the “monkey” in the clip?  A chimpanzee.

If creationists can’t tell the difference between monkeys and apes, you can imagine how reliable they are on evolution.

Karen, have you been listening to those pesky pastors, priests and padres again.
You know they only tell you lies to keep you enslaved so you’ll keep coming back so you’ll give them money.
You know none of those bastards would work in an Iron lung.
Haven’t you seen thru their scam yet?

From MC Hawking.....

They need to read a book that ain’t so damn old old,
let reason take hold,
though truth to be told,
they’re probably already too far gone,
withdrawn, the conclusion foregone.
But maybe there is still hope for the young,
if they reject the dung being slung from the tongues,
of the ignorant fools who call themselves preachers,
and listen instead to their science teachers.

Karen makes baby Jesus cry.

Does that mean Karen won’t dazzle us with her brilliance?

Interesting turn of phrase, though, to rationalize—as opposed to to reason. It made me chuckle…

Karen don’t feel you have to rationalise or reason with us. Just give us something that is a) true and b) disproves evolution. Examples being Species with no DNA common to any other. Species showing regressive features, species showing more DNA commonality than should be possible, credible explanation of why a species has a useless feature (eg a whale’s legs), credible explanation why a ‘designed feature’ is poorly designed compared to similar in another animal (eg the position of the prostrate), especially in relationship to a lesser feature (eg the Human eye).

sorry that should be lesser Creature

Hi Swordsbane and everybody else. Thanks for coming to this website that is entirely dedicated to “so frantically attempting to disprove” something that you don’t agree with. It’s sick how many double minded people there are on both sides of the fence. Keep “attacking the straw man” and good luck “bullying people intelectually”. That is one instance where you had better at least believe in luck. May you be satisfied with your obsession.
Eric

Daltonboy, It’s 9.24 am, I’m sober, I’m not too stupid, English is my first language, your post is relatively free of grammatical and spelling mistakes and there are 74 words I have no problems in reading and understanding individually, but WTF are you talking about boy?

Daltonboy:  What ‘fence’ are you talking about?  The fence between rational and irrational?  I got no problem with people trying to ‘disprove’ evolution, and I got no problem with religous people saying “I don’t care, I don’t believe in evolution.”

But what we got here is people playing in the sandbox and saying there aint no sand.  If you’re going to use science to help you disprove evolution, then the very first thing you have to have is SCIENCE.  You can call creationism anything you want, even the TRUTH and I won’t speak one word against you or try to “bully you intelectually” but you can’t call it science.  It just isn’t.  That isn’t arrogance or ‘bullying’ It’s a fact, over and above all the other things both sides are claiming.

My obsession, Daltonboy, is keeping church and state separate so children can be educated in reality rather than religion, and public policy (which affects the world my kids live in after I’m gone) can be decided based on science, not superstition.

But the fundamentalists “frantically” want to insert their old legends into education and public policy.  That’s what bugs me and why I bother writing about this stuff.  Can’t speak for the others, we all have our reasons. 

Whatever you want to believe privately, hey, knock yourself out.

Eric:

Thanks for coming to this website that is entirely dedicated to “so frantically attempting to disprove” something that you don’t agree with

Unless I’ve misread Les’ intentions for the past year-and-a-half, your characterization of this website is pretty off.

It’s sick how many double minded people there are on both sides of the fence.

To what are you referring?

Keep “attacking the straw man” and good luck “bullying people intelectually”.

Done and done.

That is one instance where you had better at least believe in luck.

I did believe in luck, until I discovered the concept of probability.

May you be satisfied with your obsession.

And may you find joy in your nonsensical musings.

The silly thing is that it used to be enough for men of faith to say “God works in mysterious ways” when they were confronted by things that didn’t exactly meet the text of the bible.  The bible doesn’t even pretend to be the literal word of God or Jesus, but a faithful transcription of what happened by people who knew God and Jesus very well, and again translated down through the ages.  Even the first major meeting of religious minds after Christianity was made the state religion of Rome was about (among other things) what to keep and what to discard when creating the official bible, and I’ll believe in the existence of an almighty savior of mankind before I believe that no politics took place at that meeting or didn’t have a hand in what to do with the bible.

Isn’t it entirely possible that we poor fallible humans got parts of the bible flat out wrong?  and Isn’t it possible that even if God exists, that evolution shows a more elegant supreme being than some magic man who just snaps his fingers and makes everything the way it is today?

Why would true believers choose to have a God who has no creativity, who has no sense of the complexity of what he was creating, no sense of what takes place after his creation is created, and links their entire faith to the finger-snapping God instead of accepting what they see and what others see and simply saying “Oh, so that’s how he did it.” ?

Which God would YOU rather believe in?

I can’t believe I’m going to post this.

Ditto..............to.............what..............L J............s....a....i...d..............a.....b.....o.......v.......e.