three4jump

It's obvious that evolution is a valid scientific theory and that creationism is an attempt at political control. By trying to talk to creationists in a rational manner, you elevate their nonsense to the status of an actual issue for debate. I doubt randman even believes half the stuff he's spewing; he just likes to keep the argument going to give creationism an aura of validity.

Would you argue evolution with a disciple of the IPU? It's like trying to teach a pig to sing: it's a waste of your time and it annoys the pig.

tronvillain

Perhaps today's <a href="http://www.krazylarry.com/" target="_blank">Krazy Larry</a> will make you feel better.

Oolon Colluphid

Richard Dawkins feels the same, which is why he tries never to debate them, thus giving the appearance that there is a debate to be had. They should not be given the kudos of so appearing.

However, if you do not oppose them, then being the vociferous little incubi that they are, their convincing-looking arguments will prevail. Have you tried a web search for something on human origins? I can guarantee that whatever you ask the engine, there'll be half a dozen cretinist sites in the top page of results.

That's why I think it's important for us educated lay people to slap them down, and only bother the real scientists (ie distract them from simply getting on with it) when we need to confirm details.

Cheers, Oolon

Automaton

The consequences of NOT opposing their bullshit would be far, far worse. Think Dark Ages.

scigirl

Well, if Lone Wolf and Jobar start a political movement to teach IPU Creationism in MY public schools, to OUR children, than yes, I would argue with them.

That is the key reason I get involved - because these YECSs want to bring their religion into the secular schools. And that is not allowed, under the first amendment.

scigirl

P.S. Sorry LW and J, but we all know that the Great Big Frog is the true creator of the universe!

MrDarwin

What I can't figure out is why creationists target public grade schools. If their motives are really scientific and philosophical rather than political, why not target universities? Why aren't creationists trying to get legislation mandating that creationism be taught in college-level biology classes?

Coragyps

And, additionally, I plan to continue to argue and debate creationists unless the highly unlikely event of my actually getting a life happens.

RufusAtticus

Because most of them don't know what a university is.

-RvFvS
(Was that too mean?)

Megatron

BLASPHEMY! The IPI will know of your transgressions!!

David Bowden

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> Heck no! <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

But I think they actually do know what a university is: a critical-thinking nexus populated with knowledgable specialists in the field, ready and motivated to make an impressive display of intellectual force. This is one case where stuffy academic arrogance is an asset. If American public universities ever lose ground on this issue, it'll break my heart.

Unfortunately, public grade schools usually do not have devoted and influential scientists available, and school board members (and so many science teachers!) are too often lacking in basic scientific understanding, so they can be easily swayed by the sort of snake-oil salesmen who've descended on Ohio and the UK.

Which makes it important, as Oolon mentioned, for those of us who can, to be active in whatever ways we can, to limit the mismanagement of the next generation's education.

-Wanderer

[ March 22, 2002: Message edited by: wide-eyed wanderer ]</p>