Your EvC Debate Dream Team - Fantasy Debating

Hi Slevesque, Sure, you can find someone who will question any part of the scientific consensus, but in the case of gravity, this is very unusual and on the fringe.In creationism this is the norm. Every time a new creationist registers here, we have to work out exactly which of the many flavours of creationism they favour, and there are a great many varieties. Is the Earth old or young for example? This is a major division amongst creationists. Is Christian creationism true or is Islamic creationism the one? Christians creationists may be the most vocal on this forum, but I seriously doubt that they make up a worldwide majority of those with creationist views. This is a major schism in creationist thought and one which will never be healed. There is nothing comparable in science. Indeed they are. Now define "kind".See the problem?Mutate and Survive

---

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage

But surely you must recognise that opinions within creationism are much more diverse than on my side of the game? I don't think that there are even two creationist members here that broadly agree on their positions. There are Islamic "creation scientists" you know. Creation science can't even agree on which god is supposed to be the creator.You will also see major differences between the major Christian creationist organisations that are so popular online. These groups pretend to a level of (entirely fake) professionalism, but they still disagree on many issues. How often do we see creo members here coming to each others defence? Not often.I would say that the reason that creationists are such poor team players is that they cannot be. The sheer diversity of opinion, even within religious sects, is just too great. I would call that a side effect of the creationist habit of making shit up.Mutate and Survive

Hi slevesque, You know why that is? It's because science-minded people tend to admit it when they're wrong.When an evo corrects another evo at this site, there is a pattern. The corrected person goes and checks, realises that they're wrong and comes back and apologises or at least acknowledges that they were wrong.When creationists are corrected, their fingers go straight in their ears and the singing of la-la-la starts up.But then, why would creationists correct each other anyway? None of you agree with each other in the first place. Why would you correct Buz on his Exodus nonsense? You don't even agree with his basic premise. Why would you correct ICANT on his "Days of Peleg" madness? You don't agree with his home-brewed version of creationism.In my experience, almost every creationist on this board has a different version of creationism. You have no urge to correct each other because you are essentially arguing for completely different worldviews. You guys have no central consensus that you can refer to, beyond the Bible, which actually says very little about creation. This stands in stark contrast to evolutionary biology, where there is a consensus and where those who support the idea value that consensus above and beyond their own pet theories.Mutate and Survive

---

On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. - Charles Babbage