And comparing politics with creationism is not a ********** comparison. There are facts that can be mustered for political issues that i'm just not always up on, but creationism is mostly a matter of interpretation, as is evolutionism. Different category of thought.
"legitimate" is a banned word? Well bugger me!
The comparison is not between creationism and politics, but rather in the commonality of the practitioners. Whenever you have proponents for any possible position who know nothing more than what the pushers of that position have to say, then this same situation will arise. That is what I was describing, followers who know nothing more than what they had been told and have never thought any of it through and thus are incapable of discussing nor defending any of it.
Not "different categories of thought", but rather the Same Old Situation (SOS, AKA "Same Old Shite").
It is true I report what I hear from people I trust, and they do muster quite a bit of evidence for what they say. And when I do have the actual facts I do report them here.
No you won't. You never have and you never will. We already know your wicked ways far too well.
Also, your handlers (the "people you trust") will never give you the details nor tell you the truth. For to do so would educate you and thus reduce their ability to deceive you.
..., and they do muster quite a bit of evidence for what they say.
Such as
WHAT???
Have they presented any of that evidence to you? So then
present it to us!
Oh, they only tell you that they have all this evidence but they don't present it to you. Yeah, we've seen that before.
True story. In the early 1980's, Charles Lang was a contract technical writer working with us on a military contract. He was the first young-earth creationist I had met. I talk about this in my 1990 essay for CompuServe,
Why I Oppose Creation Science (or, How I got to Here from There) (my initial reasons for creating a web page was dual: 1) to learn HTML, and 2) to repost my uploads to CompuServe's Religion and Science Library).
Charles Lang and I attended a "creation/evolution debate" together:
quote:
All that I was learning came in handy, because on 28 September 1985, both Henry Morris and Duane Gish came to Long Beach to debate Frank Awbrey and William Thwaites (frequent contributors to C/E who together taught a Two-Model class at San Diego State University in which half the lectures were given by the ICR -- it was in this class that Gish's false claims about the bombardier beetle were exposed). In all, it went almost exactly as I had come to expect from the debates reported in Creation/Evolution Newsletter.
The punch line is that as we were leaving the "debate", Charles was almost literally in shock. He kept mumbling, "We have mountains of evidence that would blow the evolutionists away. Why didn't they present it? We have mountains of evidence. ... " These were his idols, Gish and H. Morris, who basically just caved when confronted by two university professors (San Diego State University).
The explanation of the punch line is that the creationists never had any such "mountains of evidence", but rather that was all just a massive liie they kept telling their followers.
You are now in the same situation. You have been fed all kinds of liies by the Trumpist right wingnuts, none of which are true. If you had even a sixteenth of the awareness that Charles Lang had had, you would also be wander about in shock that the liies you had been fed all this time were indeed liies.
BTW, an interesting bit of trivia: in the UK, "trump" means "fart". Oddly appropriate, don't you think?
™ Version 4.2
(1)