Reasons for Creationist Persistence

quote:

---

I'm just responding from the perspective of one who is legitimately fascinated by science AND who subscribes unequivocally to a creationist paradigm.

---

If you are talking about Biblical Creationism, I cannot see how it and science can be anything other than diametrically opposed.They are completely different ways of thinking about evidence.

quote:

---

Not only that but they seem to be shut out from most peer reviews.

---

Really?Can you list the last dozen or so Creation science papers that were submitted for publication to mainstream scientific journals?Further, you do know that most mainstream science papers are rejected for publication the first time they are submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, don't you?

quote:

---

AiG, Morris, Johnson, Behe, etc. And they are very good at getting their resources distributed. And much of it is very convincing, especially to us who are untrained to understand a good deal of it, and are ignorant of the expansive literature on the subject. We are told it is a theory in crisis, that "hundreds" of biologists are being persuaded every day that it is false, etc. They are good Christian men, who talk about Jesus; are we are predisposed to believe what they say.

---

But are they really "good Christian men" if they lie, distort the evidence, misquote scientists, and fail to correct their errors even when they are publically shown to be wrong?I mean, the whole idea of Creation "science" is just a crass attempt at dressing up biblical literalism in a lab coat and getting it to hold a beaker in it's hand to make religion appear scientific.There is no reason to do this other than to make their extreme version of Christianity more palatable to people in a modern age where science provides us with so many answers to questions that previously were attributed to "Goddidit".The only conclusion is that they are completely deluded or believe that "Lying for Jesus" is perfectly fine.Edited by nator, : No reason given.