Replies

The evolutionist knows he can't win a scientific debate of the theory. His only hope is to divert the discussion to something else.

He will likely use some personal attacks. He will question your real motives for doubting evolution. He will attack the credibility of any authorities you cite (and some you didn't cite). He will attempt to get you to defend yourself, defend the authorities he has maligned, or attack him. If he can get you to do any of these things, he has achieved his objective (which is to avoid talking about the theory of evolution).

You made a claim, then wouldn't back it up with proof.

All I wanted is to see your proof so that I could read it myself. And you couldn't even do that.

So now you are on a silly jihad.

But, keep it up, you make my point.

The proper venue for debating scientific issues is at science conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. In such a venue the claims can be checked by anyone at their leisure. Creationists, with very rare exceptions, are unwilling to debate there.

You will perhaps claim that creationist articles are "censored" from peer-reviewed journals. This is not the case. Creationist papers are not published because creationists do not try to get them published. This is because science is not very important to them. The priorities of creationism are politics and religious evangelism. In a survey of editors of sixty-eight journals only eighteen (18) of an estimated one hundred and thirty five thousand (135 000) submissions were found that could be described as advocating creationism. (Quarterly Review of Biology 60:21-30)

In the McLean vs Arkansas Board of Education creationism trial, creationists were when asked, unable to present any examples of creationist articles which had been refused publication in a scientific journal.