tgamble

Remember, it's AIG. Evolutionits are lying, godless scum by definition.

You sound surprised. It's AIG for christ's sake! They never give evidence! It's against policy.

Dark Jedi

No. Klingons have honor.

Maybe a crazed offspring of a Ferrengi and a Borg...

Bubba

Wouldn't this be better worded "...it's AIG for Darwin's sake..."?

Bubba

Albion

Speaking as a trekkie, I don't think Klingons deserve such an insult! Honour is very important to Klingons. I'm trying hard not to say that the Ferengi would be a better match. Maybe the Romulans? Or the Cardassians?

The Lone Ranger

Never underestimate the capacity of human beings to believe that what they want to be true is true.

Still, in the case of such people like Morris and Gish, it's difficult to believe that they don't know they're lying. They obviously go to a lot of effort to (mis)quote actual scientists in order to "prove that even evilutionists don't believe in it." When you realize how carefully they must rework "evolutionists" writings in order to make it seem that they're saying something very different from what they're actually saying, it's difficult to believe that Morris and company are unaware of their duplicity. When they deliberately rewrite something by someone like Stephen Jay Gould to make it sound like he's admitting that "evilution" is a false theory, they can't possibly be unaware that they're completely misrepresenting Gould's views.

In some cases, these "professional creationists" as I like to call them are probably doing it simply out of a self-serving desire for power/money/influence, whatever. That, and a cynical conviction that most of their followers are too stupid to realize they're being lied to, and/or too lazy to check the original sources.

In other cases, the professional creationists probably honestly believe that they're doing a greater good by "lying for Jesus," as it were. After all, the modern Creationist movement is almost entirely based upon Christianity. The Creationists don't try very hard to disguise this, either, despite calling what they do "science." They make it quite clear that they see this as a war between science and (their version of) Christianity.

I suspect that a great many Creationists are perfectly well-aware that they're lying, but they honestly think that they're serving a greater good by doing so. After all, they see this as a war between Evolution and Christian Belief -- if you can save people from Hell by lying to them, a lot of people will regard this as a perfectly justified thing.

***

For the average rank-and-file Believer, though, the issue seems very cloudy, I think. As TerryTryon has pointed out, a tremendous number of people listen to the "Creation Scientists" and -- being almost totally ignorant of science -- think that with all that talk, the Creationists must surely have a good case. They hear Creationists say that there are no transitional fossils, that it's astronomically improbable that even a single protein could be assembled by chance, much less a living cell, and that evolution has never been observed. Most people simply don't have the education to be able to recognize that these are lies and distortions, and so "Creation Science" sounds just as convincing to them as does "Evolution Science."

***

I think that most people who are Creationists are basically just ignorant. They have no real idea of what science is in general, and even less of an idea what evolutionary biology is about. They've been spoon-fed the "Professional Creationists'" lies pretty-much from birth, and so have been raised to believe that "Creation Science" is just as legitimate as is "Evolution Science."

Most people find the concept of a personal, interventionist God to be comforting. Most people find the concept of a vast Universe that's billions of years old incomprehensible (and perhaps frightening -- it upsets the human ego to think that the Universe doesn't revolve around us). Most people seem to find the implications of biological evolution [namely, a natural world that evidently doesn't care about us, and that is not micromanaged by any deity] to be frightening or even disgusting.

It's not surprising, given all of this, that a great many people would want to believe the Creationists' lies. I doubt that most people are especially inclined to honestly investigate and evaluate the evidence.

***

One cannot read any modern textbook of psychology without realizing that memory is far less reliable than we like to think. People have an astounding capacity to remember things which conform to their expectations and desires about how the world works, while instantly dismissing and forgetting data which contradict their expectations and desires.

Cheers,

Michael

[ November 03, 2002: Message edited by: The Lone Ranger ]</p>

scigirl

Thank you Michael, for that insightful post.

scigirl

Atheist121

It's a cheap debate tactic to claim that your flaws/mistakes are your opponents. This way, it confuses people who aren't involved with the debate as to who is actually in err. I remember writing something about Creationists (probably Hovind) doing this some time ago.

unregistered_user_1

Like hell. These people are more like the aliens from the "New Jedi Order Series": the Yuuzhan Vong. A race of religious fanatics bent on either converting or killing all the "infidels" in the galaxy that they believe their gods have given to THEM. Also, it is not immoral in their society to lie if it furthers their cause. A real-life example is this quote from Martin Luther:

from:
By the way, for some evidence of both the "Gish Gallop" technique which AIG accuses Miller of, and of creationist lying, see
<a href="http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/gish.html" target="_blank">Creationism: Bad Science or Immoral Pseudoscience by Joyce Arthur</a>

Jimmy Higgins

Cardassians, that's it. They have a strong family model, however, they'll stab anyone not like them in the back. Darn Cardassians!

Well, we never said it "proved" it. We said it is strong evidence for it.

At what point does their ideaology go from faith to mere delusion?

[ November 04, 2002: Message edited by: Jimmy Higgins ]</p>