Loudmouth writes:
I might also add that people incapable of understanding contradictory evidence due to their limited background in the sciences are also not being dishonest, just dogmatic (which is a problem unto its own).
If this is the case, one could also argue that misquoting other people or misrepresenting their ideas are also dogmatic, because people's faith requires them to do whatever it takes to make the evidence fit their faith. In other words, there's really no such thing as dishonesty on these boards then.
Edited:
Here is why I said people try to beat the evidence with whatever they have to make them fit their faith. Just how often do you hear a creationist admits or says "gee, I've never considered it that way before. Thank you for the new information and I hope I will learn more in the future"?
In a lot of these cases, they just run away or stop answering all together.
Would avoiding to answer certain questions or refuse to admit genuine evidence count as dishonesty or just being dogmatic?
[This message has been edited by Lam, 04-28-2004]
The Laminator