Do creationists actually understand their own arguments?

Hello Taz,I have tangled with IamJoseph and Dawn Bertot on a number of occasions. I do not doubt that they sincerely believe that their arguements are totally clear, logical and scientifically sound. I do not doubt that they believe that they have actually found the correct answer and cannot understand how the rest of us can continue to miss something that is so blindingly obvious. We just cant seem to see the mistakes we are all making. I amnot saying all creationists are like them. I am also not saying that they are the only two out there. I would say they are fairly extreme examples.Their positions seem to rest mainly on two key tactics.1. Repetition of their arguements (and repetition that you just don't understand them).2. Repetition that they are right.I imagine that a newcomer like myself comes along every now and then and, in their naivety, throws themselves into debates with these sort of people with noble intentions. My only hope is that I was able to serve as an example to others that there is little point of throwing yourself on those particular rocks.I do think that they know exactly what they are talking about. The unfortunate thing is that the subject that they are knowledgable about is a unique personal interpretation of reality.There used to be a crazy guy who lived in a big pile of newspapers in a vacant lot (he used to pee in empty bottles and keep them). He was able to lecture for hours (often to no one at all) about all sorts of things. He was very knowledgable about his chosen subject matter. The only issue was that he was the only one who could see the things that he saw. IamJoseph and Dawn Bertot know their position very, very well. I have seen IamJosephs claims on a dozen or more different forums. The same story over and over again to anyone who will listen. I dont know if DW is active elsewhere but I would not be surprised.They are no different to any fanatic really. It is just they they are in a minority of one. I suppose if there were a hundred followers of their theories, it would not change the fact that they sound crazy.on another note...I commend and applaud you sir for being able to give a 'lecture on the importance of bond strength between the reinforcement material in concrete (i.e. steel) and the concrete itself in regard to structural integrity' and still have the attention of your audience. Most groups of men could sit through a lecture on 'boobs in film' for hours and remain attentive to their lecturer. But to keep your audiences attention on your particular subject leads me to believe you to be a formidable speaker. Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

From my original post on this thread Message 5Discussing the tactics of IMJ and DB - Examples in this thread -

quote:

---

all of my positions derive thier conclusions from reality and nothing else

---

Message 10

quote:

---

My first guess is that you actually do understand you simply have no response.

---

Message 11

quote:

---

Your problem is that youve been educated poorly in philosophical and logical matters. And you certainly understand nothing about Biblical matters, it appears

---

Message 11

quote:

---

Have you thought that while you posses great language skills, yout thinking may be very simplistic. Im seeing this demonstrated in my discussion with Butterfly.

---

Message 38

quote:

---

While you understand your respective field, have you considered the fact you might be simplistic in many other areas of thinking, or thinking in general?

---

Message 38This proves my point. Has it occured to you DB that we may actually be intelligent enough to understand your arguments, but that your arguments do not support your position? You continue to claaim that anyone who disagrees with your position is somehow deficient.Has it occured to you that you may actually be wrong?Of course not. You are the only one who is intelligent enough to have the correct answer. All of the posters who disagrees with you, regardless of how many there are (and there are a lot) are all wrong.How many people would have to disagree with you before you even considered the possibility that you may be wrong?Lets see you prove my point even further in your response. Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

Hello Dawn Bertot, This is incorrect. It would all depend on what they are saying. I cant speak for everyone on this but I know that I do not disagree with something someone says just because they are a theist of a creationist. I disagree with things that IMJ and yourself say for totally different reasons. This forum is not a simple as 2 sides. I would not put all of the Creationists on the same side. From what I can understand, IMJ supports Evolution and the Big Bang Theory because he believes that the Book of Genesis outlines these theories. This is not a common position amongst creationists.If you do not disagree with what Buzz, ICANT, IMJ and Jaywill (and others) say, does that mean that there is some sort of consensus amongst that group?How is it possible to not disagree with some of what those individuals say when they say opposing things?For example, check out this thread... Message 1It is a thread of over 300 posts written by discussing the reading of Genesis chapter 1, verse 1. When have you guys ever all agreed?