What Are Creationists Afraid Of?

The New Individualist ^ | 1/2006 | Ed Hudgins

[P-Marlowe]

Because how the first life forms originated has no bearing on the validity of evolution.

Baloney. You avoid the first step of evolution because you have no natural explanation for it. To even discuss it in the context of evolution opens the door to supernatural explanations and if you invite any discussion beyond a simple naturalistic explanation, then you have to admit that the possibility of a supernatural cause for abiogensis and the evolution of the first life forms would leave upon the door for a supernatural explanation for the development of complex life forms, which you refuse to even consider.

So you drop it from the discussion.

When I took biology in High School we were all told that the lowest forms of life "evolved" from non-living matter. But since the conditions in which such an event occurred have been impossible to duplicate and since there have been significant challenges to that theory, the whole idea of abiogenesis appears to have been silently removed from the curriculum.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Okay, so you don't believe that God or universal morality actually exist, but you find it necessary and/or useful to promote the belief that they do. That an accurate statement?

No.

They are both informal fallacies in their appeal to false authority. But, don't take my word for it...

TEST my syllogism with a truth table or use a Venn diagram to test it for categorical logic.

[xzins]

Assumptions will kill us.

There were no "ignored" responses. There was, however, a granddaughter that I was babysitting.

(We had to discuss Arnie the Armadillo and Dora the Explora.)

She is a gift from God....no accident by any means...so I guess she fits into this discussion. :>)

[Doctor Stochastic]

Institute for Creation Research [sic] article on Darwin causing capitalism (they disapprove). PDF file.

[Dimensio]

Baloney.

1) Naturalisitic processes to be determined caused molecular compounds to gradually come togther in a correct configuration for imperfect self-replication.
2) A divine agent of unspecified nature zap-poofed the first life forms into existence.
3) Aliens from another planet and/or dimension seeded the early Earth with life
4) Humans in the future travel back in time and plant the first life forms, making life a causality loop.
5) Some process other than the above four.

Which of the above must be true for evolution to occur? If you can't give a reason as to why evolution is impossible if any of the other four are true, then your claim of "Baloney" is bogus.

To even discuss it in the context of evolution opens the door to supernatural explanations

Supernatural explanations have no place in science. If the real cause of the first life forms was supernatural intervention then science will simply never be able to explain where the first life forms originated. That does not falsify evolution.

[b_sharp]

"I've always wondered why we can't fly. It would be a major benefit I think. Why haven't we been able to adapt to flight?

Why do you believe that just because something may be a good idea that some organism should have evolved that way? Evolution has no direction, no intent. Its all contingent on what it starts with and what mutations just happen to occur.

Mutation (variation) happens first then the environment decides if it will allow it. Talk about complex systems. The interaction between the organism's parts and thingees and the environment is highly complex.

[Senator Bedfellow]

Okay, so you do believe that God and universal morality exist?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The mythical rights of women or men are also meaningless.

The very concept of rights is also founded in religion and morality. Since the enlightened person is freed from any primitive superstitions about some ‘God’ they are free from having to worry about rights. Only raw power counts, and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful.

[microgood]

The placement of the economy is irrelevant. It is a fact that the world economy is an artifact of humanity, however that humanity, the agent you are so concerned with becomes a simple cog in the machine with no 'intelligent' input. The direction, the wavelike undulations of the economy, is not directed by that agent but by a random collection of cogs making up a economic homunculus with no intelligence whatsoever. It is a complex system. Humans can not predict or direct any complex system let alone one that we are a part of.

The reason humans cannot predict or direct parts of a large economy is not because it is complex, but because it is irrational. The stock market is irrational. Consumer confidence is irrational. Humans are 90% irrational in their everyday lives. And that is what you are describing here.

This is why trying to break things like irrational economies, or love, or hate or fear into little pieces and analyze them as if they were something predictable never works. It is called Postmodern reductionism and did not work in the Enlightenment period and will not work now.

The study of the irrational side mankind cannot be done by scientific methods. It is done by accumulation of knowledge through history and going with what works. The very reason capitalism works is that it recognizes the concept of enlightened self interest and takes into account the essential irrationality of the human race; i.e that through trial and error we have found out it works with less conflict than other methods.

[furball4paws]

I think you are right. Caught with his pants down he resorts to trying to hide behind flatulence.

Throughout history some men have stood up even when they knew to do so was suicide. In spite of their politics which may not be to my liking, one has to admire them. Stephen Biko is one - Jose Rizal another. The list is not long and many of them were vilified on racial grounds of inferiority.

[Quick1]

Exactly the point that I was going to make! Evolution simply describes how something already is, and doesnt require anything in the way of talking about the creator.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Aging dung dries up, blows away and diminishes greatly in odor. In a covered jar or vessel it ferments. And thus, we have your vapid commentary intra muros, wafting forth with putrified scent from such a container being loosened...

[onedoug]

Fearing God renders all else less fearful.

[Wormwood]

You were more amusing when you were calling me 'dickhead', actually.

[P-Marlowe]

Supernatural explanations have no place in science.

If it is off the table then science is not a search for the truth. A search for the truth does not allow for any possible explanation to be removed from discussion. The problem is that natural science has no explanation for the existence of nature. But since you have ruled out the supernatural from scientific study, you have no scientific way of determining how the natural came into existence.

The fact is that the presence of the natural presupposes the supernatural.

[xzins]

When I took biology in High School we were all told that the lowest forms of life "evolved" from non-living matter. But since the conditions in which such an event occurred have been impossible to duplicate and since there have been significant challenges to that theory, the whole idea of abiogenesis appears to have been silently removed from the curriculum.

Exactly. What you describe is precisely what I was taught.

Remember them waxing eloquent about that "protein stew" and the lightening bolt?

I'm thinking of my recipe for "Stormy Day Bean Soup with Ham."

Lots of protein :>)

See #403

[Jorge]

I personally am surprised when I see many people who claim to believe in the God revealed in the Bible, yet they reject His assertion that their existence is due to a direct act of creation by that God as he himself revealed in stone on the Tablets that he presented to Moses on Mt. Sinai.

It's a very strange disconnect that enables people to claim belief in the God of the Bible, but at the same time reject His direct authority over them by rejecting His Words. It's self deceit.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The mythical rights of women or men are also meaningless.

The very concept of rights is also founded in religion and morality. Since the enlightened person is freed from any primitive superstitions about some ‘God’ they are free from having to worry about rights. Only raw power counts, and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful.

[b_sharp]

"That's the interpretation of some, not all. I'm still waiting for them to find the famous "ape-like creature"."

What 'ape-like creature'?

If you are doubting transitionals you are misinformed. There are many fossils that appear to be an organism between a chimpy thing and Homo sapiens. Each of them is the 'missing link' and collectively they are the missing link. The link is only missing for creationists. Funny they can't agree on which one is just an ape and which one is just a human. If they can't figure it out then they must really be kind of both ape and man.

[P-Marlowe]

Remember them waxing eloquent about that "protein stew" and the lightening bolt?

Yup, and when they were done with the experiment they would serve up the soup in the cafeteria along with creamed corn and warm milk.

I think we are dating ourselves here x.