|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creationist Friendly Q&A | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
I know that there are quite a few creationist lurkers here at this site, as well as evolutionist lurkers. I see a lot of first time posters relating their reluctance to ask questions because they feel intimidated. Along with this we see a lot of creationists who do not understand how the theory of evolution works or what the theory says.
I think we can kill two birds with one stone. I am proposing that this thread be available for people of all stripes, but mainly creationists, to ask questions about science. Experts in each field will answer the questions as best they can without ridicule and without debate. I don't want this to be a debate thread but rather a place where people will not feel intimidated when they ask a question. As an example, posters can ask questions such as "if man evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" and get a response that is fair minded and accurate. Perhaps we can also have a sister thread where agnostics/atheists can ask religious questions that can be answered by theists in the same spirit as the science Q&A. I think this would be helpful to everyone and help get more people involved.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
"if man evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?"
The subtlety of nature is far beyond that of sense or of the understanding; so that the specious meditations, speculations, and theories of mankind are but a kind of insanity, only there is no one to stand by and observe it. -Francis Bacon "Novum Organum"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bob_gray Member (Idle past 5041 days) Posts: 243 From: Virginia Joined: |
I’ll take a stab at this one.
a) We did not evolve from monkeys.b) If you are a descendant of your mother why is she still alive?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6495 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
This is an excellent example of why a topic like this is useful.
Prophex, researchers working in the field of evolution have never claimed that we are descended from monkeys, especially if the term is taken to mean modern monkeys. That is a caricature of evolutionary science crafted by it's creationist opponents. We and monkeys are descended from a common ancestor that was neither modern man nor modern monkey.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 505 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
"If god created man from dirt, why are there still dirt around?"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
I quoted the Quote in Loudmouth's opening topic.
Just a joke. Uh, didn't expect serious answers. The subtlety of nature is far beyond that of sense or of the understanding; so that the specious meditations, speculations, and theories of mankind are but a kind of insanity, only there is no one to stand by and observe it. -Francis Bacon "Novum Organum"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joshua221  Inactive Member |
hahahaha
The subtlety of nature is far beyond that of sense or of the understanding; so that the specious meditations, speculations, and theories of mankind are but a kind of insanity, only there is no one to stand by and observe it. -Francis Bacon "Novum Organum"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bob_gray Member (Idle past 5041 days) Posts: 243 From: Virginia Joined: |
Doh! That's what I get for not reading the whole post.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trump won  Suspended Member (Idle past 1268 days) Posts: 1928 Joined: |
You may help someone in the long run though
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
Since I started this thread I thought I would step in as a pseudo-moderator. I am not a moderator, so don't take my suggestions as gospel. I was hoping that answers to questions would be without rhetoric or vitriol. Examples of less than satisfactory answers are the following (and I am not picking on anyone, just healthy criticism):
bob gray: I’ll take a stab at this one.a) We did not evolve from monkeys. b) If you are a descendant of your mother why is she still alive? Your heart was in the right place, but I was thinking that we should not answer questions with questions (as in answer b). It might have been better to say that monkeys are our cousins, not our grandparents. This one needs a little more meat, but a very nice start.
mikehager: Prophex, researchers working in the field of evolution have never claimed that we are descended from monkeys, especially if the term is taken to mean modern monkeys. That is a caricature of evolutionary science crafted by it's creationist opponents. We and monkeys are descended from a common ancestor that was neither modern man nor modern monkey. Remove the phrase "That is a caricature . . . creationist opponents" and this one works fine. Again, we (or better, I) want this thread to be as unintimidating as possible (ie free of rhetoric).
Resurrected Hector: "If god created man from dirt, why are there still dirt around?" This post is wholly inappropriate for this thread. Again, no rhetoric, sarcasm, vitriol, etc. I would prefer this thread to be unintimidating in order to give our reluctant lukers a place to ask questions that are bugging them. I would have answered the question as such (very similar top mikehager's post): Firstly, humans are actually primates, just as monkeys and apes are. To say that monkeys should not be around is saying that humans should not be around either. Secondly, the relationship between species is much like that found in your own family. Apes, monkeys, and humans (ie all primates) share a common ancestor just as you and your cousins share a common ancestor, your grandparents. Some primates species will be more distantly related than others, just as you have cousins that are more distantly related than others. Thirdly, evolution does not follow a ladder like progression. Instead, the pattern of evolution looks like a bush. Every individual of one species does not become another species over time. Instead, a sub-group of a species branches off from the larger population to become a new species. It would be expected that at some point the parent species and the daughter species would be in existence at the same time. This usually does not occur for long periods of time, but it does occur for longer time periods on occasion. I hope the description above helps everyone understand the attitude I was shooting for.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
This post is wholly inappropriate for this thread. Again, no rhetoric, sarcasm, vitriol, etc. I would prefer this thread to be unintimidating in order to give our reluctant lukers a place to ask questions that are bugging them. I disagree with you final assessment of the 'dirt' "answer". There are two things that need to be done with some of these kind of questions:1) answer them 2) show how very silly they are in the context of knowing anything at all about what is being critisized. If someone is going to have any hope of getting out of the dark hole of ignornance that the literalists view is based on they need to be able to break free from sources which are lying to them. They need to see how very silly the things which they are being fed are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loudmouth Inactive Member |
CAVEAT: I am not a moderator, so don't take anything I say as law on EvC.
quote: Eventually, yes they are going to have to do that. However, the whole process has to start slowly. Much like the groundhog seeing his shadow, if creationists get their head bit off the first time they ask a question about evolution are they going to be more or less likely to continue to investigate evolution? I think there should be one thread where questions are answered in a calm, logical, and plainly spoken fashion. That is why I titled the thread "Creationist Friendly Q&A". I was hoping that this thread could be a place for lurkers to ask questions they may feel too intimidated to ask in other threads. That is my hope, but reality may prove to be different. We'll see.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 505 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Loudmouth writes:
I disagree. Eventually, yes they are going to have to do that. However, the whole process has to start slowly. Much like the groundhog seeing his shadow, if creationists get their head bit off the first time they ask a question about evolution are they going to be more or less likely to continue to investigate evolution? I think a technical answer would be a lot more intimidating than the one I gave. For example, you answered
quote:While your answer is simple and right to the point, I feel like it is simple and right to the point to someone that already has dealt with evolution before. If we are dealing with someone that genuinely don't know why monkeys are still here IFF we decended from them, the best way to answer such question is to point out the sillyness of such logic. A technical will do more damage than good. If someone really takes this question seriously (which by the way I've seen this question/argument a kazillion times before), you really think he is going to understand anything you wrote up there? I still think the best way to answer the "why are there monkeys..." question is the answer I gave. It's non-intimidating and it uses the exact same line of logic that the person used.
That is why I titled the thread "Creationist Friendly Q&A". I think it would be more creo-friendly if you try to avoid the technical parts as much as possible. They don't have any science background. To someone like you, who is well versed in the theory itself, it must seem insulting if you were to get what I said. However, you are not the creo and trying to point out the silliness behind the logic of the question is noninsulting at all. I'm rambling, aren't I?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gary Inactive Member |
I'm not sure its best to throw one-liners at creationists without explaining things. Just because they might not have much knowledge of science doesn't mean they are too stupid to understand it. I think that we should afford them the same respect we would want to be treated with if we asked them a question about the Bible.
It is quite possible to explain why there are still monkeys without ascending to a level where our explanation goes over a layperson's head. We just need to treat those who ask questions as intelligent people who want to learn something.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024