YHAOS: "Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot. There’s plenty of that going around. But who started it is a complicated matter that I don’t think either you or I are ever going to adequately explain or resolve."
I think, YHAOS, you don't know quite as much as you think you know about this, and you're shooting wild here. This history is not that complicated (btw, my education is not in science, but it is in history):
The Biblical account of creation was accepted as fact by nearly everyone until the 19th century. Then geologists began to realize that rock strata had to be very ancient, and biologists like Darwin began to see that relationships among species had to date back very far in time.
By the early 1900s, when the theory of evolution became widely known, laws were passed in the US to prevent it being taught in schools, for fear of evolution overturning a biblical world view.
By the 1960s these anti-evolution laws were themselves being overturned, as courts declared them unconstitutional teachings of religion.
Since the 1960s, Creationists and now Intelligent Designers have been fighting politically to get back into the public science classes -- so far without much success.
Back in the early 1900s, Creationists at least argued the truth, which was that the Biblical world view had to be protected from inroads by science.
Today, by contrast, they can only argue a Big Lie, which is that they have a serious "scientific alternative" to Evolution. They don't. None of their so-called science has been accepted by any major scientific group.
If it WERE, then we would have a MUCH different debate here.
So let me mention briefly, differences between the debates over evolution and "global warming."
In global warming there ARE major scientists doing serious work in that field who publish peer-reviewed articles saying, in effect: "wait just a minute here, AlGore is full of beens." We see articles on this almost every day in Free Republic.
So, Global Warming is a serious debate amongst scientists. But Evolution is not. There is no serious debate about basic evolution amongst scientists, because the basic science is completely accepted, by scientists.
And, as always, it's completely rejected by Creationists, who today pretend to be scientific Intelligent Designers, but so far have made no actual inroad into real science.
Here's my opinion: the "debate" over evolution resembles less the true debate over global warming than the fake "debate" over the Holocaust.
Being patient...
By the numbers:
#1500
”And now, just like the movies, what are the good Christian citizens of our "town" doing?”
Not buying any part of your “analogy.” It’s a comedy-spoof remake of High Noon.
#1501
”Here you've wrapped your argument up so tight, I'm having a hard time unpackaging and figuring out just what you're trying to say.”
You’re trying too hard. And, it’s not “unpackaging” [sic]. It’s known as “deconstruction.’ See the Post-Modernists, aka Marxist/Socialists, for assistance. They are experts in the art.
”I think you're asking, do I condemn lunatics whether they go under the banner of science, or politics or religion or anything else, and of course the answer is "yes." ”
And, of course, anyone who disagrees with BroJoe is a lunatic.
What I am telling you is that a very great number of the people you defend don’t believe the hokum you would give up your honor for. They are, indeed, lunatics. They think their considerable accomplishments in Science entitle them to declare with absolute certainty that God (most specifically the Judeo-Christian God) doesn’t exist. Or to determine that 90% of the Human Race must be eradicated and to contemplate the most ‘efficient’ way of going about accomplishing that laudable end.
So, tell me, BroJoe what credentials or accomplishments do you possess that gives you the cachet to dismiss the considered professional judgments of these distinguished scientists as mere “personal opinion”?
That was a question.
#1502
”What I'm starting to realize is that on this particular thread at least, defenders of science are way outnumbered and afraid to stick their heads up for fear of being rhetorically shot down by a bunch of "drunken cowboys"!
Put down that heavy clock of martyrdom you have on. It doesn’t wear well and it makes you look silly. And, quit stealing my lines { 8^). If The Masters of the Universe were the vastly superior people they make themselves out to be (maybe even a different species), they would be fearless in facing down a bunch of lowbrow, knuckle dragging Jesus freaks. No more troublesome than defeating a band of howling apes (oh, wait . . . that’s what they say we all are).
#1503
”I seriously think you must be mistaking me for someone else, because your argument here makes no sense.”
Oh, no mistake here. It’s you I’m addressing. Pretended incomprehension is something I encounter frequently when I present a forum member with a proposition that he/she cannot admit to.
Stop the dancing or end the discussion.
#1504
”This history is not that complicated”
Spare me the recitative of Darwinian talking points.
As I said, stop the dancing or end the discussion.