Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
537 online now:
dwise1 (1 member, 536 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,315 Year: 4,427/6,534 Month: 641/900 Week: 165/182 Day: 45/27 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Three Kinds of Creationists
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 5714 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 2 of 432 (81036)
01-27-2004 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by MrHambre
01-26-2004 1:58 PM


Designation: Self proclaimed genius fundie XP
Traits: Arguements from authority. Evidence = personal belief. Uses technical jargon to initially sound like they have some passing familiarity with a biological discipline but over time, their posts become more and more estoteric.
Level of science education: Studied biology 40 years ago but have not looked at a book or the primary literature since then. Well acquainted with scientific literature that has been shown to be incorrect in the interim. Completely ignorant of all subsequent research.
Favorite words:semi-meiosis, farts
First line of first post: "During my brilliant career as a famous scientist it was my observation that evolution is not supported by the evidence and that my alternate theory will shift the paradigm towards creation among the true scientists and not the blind atheistic dogmatic people who call themselves scientists"
Reaction to rebuttal: "You clearly fail to grasp the importance of what I say since you are not a real scientist like I am. I have provided rock solid evidence for creation whereas evolution has no support found in any discipline. This is also supported by the unquestionable (insert name of anti-Darwin scientist who died 100 years ago) who provided the indisputable proof that Darwin was a fraud. If you understood how the law of succession and Monte Carlo simulation disproves the change in allele frequency over time, you would see that Jehovah is the answer. It's your choice. Get a life."

[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 01-27-2004]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by MrHambre, posted 01-26-2004 1:58 PM MrHambre has taken no action

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 5714 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 3 of 432 (81039)
01-27-2004 4:39 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by MrHambre
01-26-2004 1:58 PM


forgot another one

Designation: Sy-bernetic Fundie
Traits: Quotes book titles. Repetitive posting pattern. Thinks science dictates morality. Thinks everyone else is a nazi. Finds comparison, competition, and Bosnian Serbs immoral.
Level of science education: Picked up one of Dawkin's books once, but never read it. Knows how to spell Lorenz.
Favorite word: Lorenz
First line of first post: "Comparison leads to prejudice and is not necessary in evolution thus one must only talk about relative reproduction if one does not want to become a nazi like all those darwinists."
Reaction to rebuttal: "You should all just go away."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by MrHambre, posted 01-26-2004 1:58 PM MrHambre has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Phat, posted 01-27-2004 6:52 AM Mammuthus has replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 5714 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 5 of 432 (81054)
01-27-2004 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Phat
01-27-2004 6:52 AM


Re: What IS a Creationist, anyway?
quote:
Hey Guys...Phatboy, here. I know that I am in the camp of people known as Believers in God,(Christian version) but I don't really know if I am a Creationist, per se. I believe that God was the first cause, but I also think that the guys who try and refute the traditional science theories are a bit whack. Hmm...how would I rate in your terminology?

Hi Phatboy,
A creationist is actually someone who 1. confuses abiogenesis with evolution 2. believes in a strict literal interpretation of the bible, koran, any religious text 3. then proceeds to claim that evolution is not true because they cannot understand it and that it is a conspiracy by all us evil scientist to break them away from god. From your description of yourself, you would not be a creationist but more a theistic evolutionist i.e. one who believes in god but does not find their belief in conflict with the results of methodological naturalism i.e. science.

Designation: Not quite extinct hairy scientist
Traits: Negative reaction to boneheaded comments put forth arrogantly. Can't distinguish Ginger from Amber Lynn anymore.
Favorite word: Spam..or maybe spork..Fartmann..ok it's a name..but it's one of my favorites...maybe Stephan ben Yeshua can use the guy as evidence for demons?
First line of first post: Please provide a testable and falsifiable hypothesis of (insert god/gods/ID/pink unicorns etc.)
Reaction to rebuttal (has there ever been a real creationist rebuttal???): Please provide a testable and falsifiable hypothesis of (insert god/gods/ID/pink unicorns etc.)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Phat, posted 01-27-2004 6:52 AM Phat has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022