Which came first: the young earth, or the inerrant scripture?

Speaking as a creo to evo convert, I'd have to say that neither of these is true.They began to ingrain into my head the scriptural "truths" from a very young age. Where I grew up, the answer to everything came from the catholic priests, and their answer to everything was "goddunit."I was first exposed to the idea of using evidence to come up with explanations in high school. That's right, I was introduced for the first time the idea that I can't just pull answers out of my butt no earlier than high school in the good ole USA. Even then, I disrupted my science classes very often, because rather than saying "goddunit", the teachers were giving me some other seemingly weird explanations.I went through a period of extreme confusion. On the one hand, "goddunit" had already taken hold of me. On the other, these explanations presented by the teachers were beginning to make sense.I began to really read the bible for the first time in high school.What's the moral of the story? Even though I didn't know shit about the scripture, I was absolutely convinced that "goddunit" was the explination for everything.Ok, what's my point? I believe that ignorance is the main cause for the supposed evo to creo conversions. The theory of evolution is a complex scientific concept that takes years of study and brain twisting to understand enough for one to really begin to analyze the evidence on his own. On the other hand, "goddunit" is a lot more simple and easy to understand. Combined with the necessary "have faith or go to hell" thing, it is more pleasant to see and hear in the eyes and ears of the unwashed masses.And remember our angry teen Chris? I'm convinced that every creo started out like him, a know-it-all narcissist. And don't even try to deny it. I was one, too.Which reminds me. We have the oracle of EvC (Brad). We have the wise men (Jar, Sylas, and Percy), we have the mathematician (Rrhain), we have the feminist (I think it's obvious who I'm talking about), we have the sexist (I also think it's obvious who I'm talking about), we have the gays (ahem...), we have the angry teen, we have the biologists, physicists, philosophers, etc.This forum has representatives from every group of people in our society.

You do realize that you're not the Chris I was referring to, right? I'm talking about Chris P.

So, you do not believe in the theory of gravity? What about the germ theory of disease?

You do realize that it's still only a theory, right?What about the germ theory of disease?This message has been edited by GAW-Snow, 08-25-2005 02:58 PM

Good, then. Considering that my field is physics, it should be a breeze for you for a 1 on 1 debate between us on the lack of evidence for the theory of evolution.My offer still stands. It's your chance to really make me look like a dumbass.

Tal, are you even aware that the so-called law of universal graviation doesn't always work?The reason they called these things laws because back then people were convinced that everything had to make sense and absolute. They called them laws because they thought those could explain everything. Scientists are less certain nowadays. That is why they call them theories rather than laws.For example, Newton's laws of motion. Sure, those are called laws that could explain everything until the ultraviolet catastrophe. Google it if you don't know what I'm talking about.Tal, please get to know a little more about science before continuing on your little barrage.

I'm not so interested in convincing him about the theory as I am about his liberal use of pseudoscientific phrases.As a matter of fact, has anyone here ever engaged in an evidence based conversation with Tal about evolution or bang big?

Easy. God said, "let there be ________" and just fill in the blank.

I'm beginning to think that both Tal and LB are trolls. I can't recall any time either one of these two converse with people about scientific evidence or anything scientific. What they do contribute to the forum, however, are a whole junk load of pseudoscientific facts and then just ignore anyone that either ask for more explanation or confront them about the stuff they just pulled out of their arses.

You on drugs?

My offer for a 1 on 1 debate with Tal has been up for the last week or so. Considering the subject I am fluent in, which isn't even biology, it should be easy for him to kill me in such a debate, that is if he really wants to follow through with supporting his "evo has 0 evidence..." statement, which he has repeated throughout the faith based forums.Is he even a soldier or is he just some angry teen like Chris? His behavior of state an assertion --> declare victory --> ignore all responses seems to be that of a rebellious angry teenager, not someone that is a soldier and is married.

I'm not going to retract what I said.(1) It was not an assertion that I made. It was a question.
(2) No, he is not obliged to go 1 on 1 with me, but he is obliged, by the forum rules, to support his bare assertions. Many others and myself have asked him many times to support his assertions. So far, he hasn't replied to a single one of us with a coherent and evidence based answer supportive of his assertions. What he always does, however, is just ignore virtually all posts replied to him. After a while when people realize that he's not going to respond, they just forget and forgive.
(3) He's been acting that way for as long as he's been here. Isn't it time someone call his bluff?Why don't you try to have a coherent conversation with him? He is a troll at best.

Just a question for you. Do you really think that acting like you know something about science would actually work in a place like this?

Well, for one thing, it's my field of study.