GeoTheo

One last point Rick.
Random to ME not God. I don't think anything is random to God. Think Chaos theory.

scigirl

I don't think this is what he is saying - my interpretation of Rick's post is that because people believe in a god and an inerrant bible (beliefs which have no clear scientific evidence), than scientific evidence isn't as important as other stuff (feelings or whatever) for some people.

GeoTheo - although I do agree that we tend to classify all YECs into a category and make some unfair generalizations here, I am really tired of you arguing with strawmen of people's posts.

My suggestion to you is to use the cut and paste function and argue with what people are actually saying, not a hyperbole recreation of what they said. You may find a more civil discourse ensues.

Thank you,

scigirl

scigirl

This is not Ricks' belief, but it is the belief of some christians. Read some essays here:
<a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/creation-matters.asp" target="_blank">http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/creation-matters.asp</a>
If there were no such thing as YECS, I probably wouldn't even be here. I'd be out hiking or something. I don't give a whit about refuting the existence of god, I care about people understanding science. Period. No, I do not speak for everyone, but I have a feeling I"m not alone in this sentiment. But when people's religious beliefs do contradict with science, AND their actions entail getting involved in the secular public schools, you are darn right I get involved - and if one of the ways to get involved is to poke holes in the religous belief that started the whole mess, than yes I will do it.

scigirl

Dr Rick

No, Theo, you've got it all backwards and upside-down: We have no reason to believe Christianity and many reasons not to. The Bible isn't a reliable source of information, so why should we believe anything in it without external verification. There is no "slippery slope" argument in asking for reliable objective evidence and rejecting unreliable sources as unreliable, nor does asking for reliable evidence force us into false dichotomies such as the one you present.


<strong> That's a strawman; there is no reason to bring in biblical interpretations and versions unless you know of one that supports evolution and/or refutes YEC.

<strong> We call that an ad hominem argument.

<strong> This one is a false analogy

<strong> That is just a bizzarre and irrelevant rant.

Rick