Re: Honest creationist

Ilas wrote:
I'm sure most people here have read the article by Dawkins about Dr Kurt
Wise ("Sadly, An Honest Creationist". If not, it's here:

http://www.realwildchurch.org/dawkins.html

read it and weep)

The more I've looked at the creationist movement, the more I've become
convinced that those creationists that make a living out of what they do,
or are otherwise engaged as cheerleaders for creationism, are actively
dishonest. By that, I mean they know that the evidence does not support
their stance, they know that they are misquoting others, they know that a
great deal of what they say misleads the more credulous, but they still do
it. I'm pretty sure that most are lying for god, in the belief that they're
doing it for a greater good, but it's still lying.

Anyway, that said, is there any creationist here (or elsewhere) who is
willing to say "I don't care what the evidence says, I will always believe
the bible"?

I have to say, I'd respect someone more if they did so. Apart from Wise,
the only one I've seen who came close was Nigel McQuoid of the Vardy
schools here in the UK, being interviewed by Rod Liddle on BBC TV, when he
pretty much admitted that the evidence pointed one way, but he would always
believe the bible (frightening in a state school head teacher).

While it's nice some of these guys are up-front about their motives, and
are not engaged in willful distortion of scientific evidence, the
attitude does raise a different ethical question: If you've decided _a
priori_ that the (strictly intepreted) Bible is true, why do apologetics
(including "Creation Science") at all? You've already decided to ignore
disconfirming evidence; and it's dishonest to reject that while
accepting whatever confirming evidence may turn up. ISTM you've got no
legitimate basis for the whole enterprise.

-- Kizhe


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: if naturalism is the base assumption of evolution...
    ... Calling "strawman" at ever example you don't know how to ... The great stupidity of creationists is that they _don't_ use those ... if you want to let "faith" in the door as a valid method of reasoning, ... any empirical evidence, yet people claim there is some other route to ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Apparently JQ doesnt know the proper form of an analogy AND doesnt have a clue about empirical s
    ... It is the atheists who largely cling to the pipe dream that life ... Creationists believe on faith in the initial condition that life ... Unsupportable by the evidence, ... expect to see in a transitional fossil. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: bats flew before echolocation
    ... What "quality conflicting evidence"? ... there is no evidence that the first humans were "ultra ... Creationists have always disagreed with one another, ... Evolution, however is quite true. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Can any Darwinist in this Forum....
    ... evidence for X", I can hardly provide my nonexistent evidence. ... I don't give creationists a pass. ... You have said that evolution is "just a theory", ... fossil record is ubiquitous and sudden appearance of species ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: To Alex Mak
    ... It is one thing to chose to ignore evidence that challenges your own ... And it isn't even as if these creationists ... evolution strongly support it because it is what the scientific ... successfully dictate how scientists could and could not think. ...
    (talk.origins)