Creationism IS a 'Cult'ural Movement!

Though rare, Creationists have pulled out of certain debates admitting their wrongs. They generally say something to the effect of: the evidence doesn't support our opinion (but doesn't support evolution), there's always room for new evidence, and Creationists shouldn't use this point as an argument any more. Here is an example: It is this part of the "retraction" that I wish to discuss here, as it clearly points to Creationism being a "social movement" if you will, as opposed to an open-thinking investigation of the facts through utilization of the scientific method. It is as if these very powerful Creationism "pushers" are calling out to their following asking that they now behave in a certain manner.Certainly, the use of such tactics is not becoming of a scientist, nor of sellers of a scientific theory. The Creationist leader sermons to his congregation: His flock somberly moseys on out of the meeting hall, and with them they take his suggestion, and never again do the poor brainwashed folk use his mentioned argument when debating an old-Earth proponent. Where's the science in this? It seems as if a small number of Creationists own the market on what is and on what is not to be used/brought up when entering into a debate with a real scientist. Since when is power used to convince people of scientific facts? Who are these men who think they can stand up behind a podium, tell their followers something, and have it instantly be made true?The only place we see this kind of behaviour is in a cult, not in a laboratory.J0NEdited by Jon, : Changed Title & Added Subtitle.Edited by Jon, : Removed Message to Admins.

---

In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species

Well.. pretty much that Creationism is NOT science. Not just because of the "evidence" or the way it is "gathered" (we all know it is just made up), but because of the fact that it is driven by what those at the head of the monster tell everyone else. There's no free thinking; no one coming up with new ideas. It's like a cult, a religion, no matter how much Creationists want to deny it.I just figured that there would be a number of people who agreed with me on this, and perhaps an equal number who disagree. Thought maybe we could get a little discussion going on what people think of the way Creationism pushes its followers to believe this and that... and often they switch back on the same evidence. There's no evidence to support it, and it's ALL based on what the leaders say. It's a cult.I hope that cleared it up J0N

Yes.Edited by Jon, : Typing error.Edited by Jon, : Original edit was a correction on the wrong thing.

Maybe not, but we can prove that gravity exists here on Earth. Can you prove God exists here on Earth? If there's no way to prove God, then are there any ways to disprove Him? If not, then the idea of God is non-falsifiable (cannot be proven false), and therefore NON-scientific. At least, this is how I understand it. And, if it's non-scientific, any scientist would have to be quite foolish to attempt to study it in a scientific manner.

The bulk of the history of mankind is absent of the theory of evolution, and I'd argue that since its introduction into scientific thought, anyone not accepting it would be (perhaps by definition) not smart .J0N

I'll go with that.Cult was just one of the words I used in the OP (and the title ). We could also talk about Creationism in just the fact that it is a social movement and not a line of scientific thought. It's a fad (phad?), so to speak, led not by logical science, but by conservative blabber of community figures (preachers, pastures, fathers, etc.) or by other religious leaders such as K. Hovind.The main purpose of much of this blabber is (as far as I've been able to tell) meant to restrict education of the populace in order that it adheres to a strict set of beliefs outlined by the religious leaders. In the end, it is the religious leaders that are making the rules; defining how God works; who God is. Once people are educated to the truth of science, and no longer believe that God will come fiering out of the sky in His chariots to slice them down, they tend to stop paying attention to the religious leaders; they stop seeing them as the source for God's knowledge. They seek it out on their own; they learn; they discover; and the religious leaders slowly lose control of the public. They begin to lack the ability to influence people in their decisions: how they vote, what they believe, where they give their money.Religious leaders are looking out for their own. As followers disapear, so too do collection-plate profits. And without such income, where would these religious leaders be? Poor?It's all about power.J0N

Actually, from what I've seen in my few years of living, those towns tend to be the most conservative towns with the people being far more fundamentalistic than in other areas... such as my town. Evolution is still not widely accepted... so I don't see your point.J0N

If you pull my topic off into Global Warming, I'll tan your ass so fast you'll be lucky YOU don't melt! Now, why don't you tell all of us how it is that Creationism is in fact a scientifiic thought, as opposed to a cultural movement that uses "strength in numbers" as its driving force. If you have nothing to say to that fact, then why don't you just leave and stop tainting our good time!J0N

Well... would you be happy if the kids were being taught every theory put forth ever?Perhaps we're descended from aliens... or the world is phlat? There is also only so much time in a day, year, etc., for children to be learning. What good would it be to waste all that time teaching them every crack-pot theory out there? Wouldn't it be better to give them a deeper understanding of the truth?J0N

Egyptian scientists of their day may have claimed that the "shooting stars" they saw were droplettes of ejaculate from the gods. Now, they were scientists, and they did figure some things out, but does that mean we should start expecting people to believe that meteorite showers are giant sky orgies?It has been common throughout history for humans to attribute anything they cannot readily explain to gods or some other supernatural force. Over time, science has helped to get rid of these cop-outs and to discover the real and natural reasons behind the workings of our world.Newton was a scientist, true. And he made some discoveries in physics, true. However, just because he is right on one point, doesn't mean he has an authority whereby anything he says is automatically true. His arguments are still subject to the same rules as everyone else's: he must provide evidence in support of his claims. And besides, I believe a lot of his theories on gravity (if not all) have been surpased by Einstein. (someone will probably correct me on this... hell, it will probably be you! )I know you've been almost "stockholmed" by the Creationist movement; brainwashed to believe anything the "authorities" tell you without ever investigating it or critically analyzing it. I was there once too, and trust me when I say that if you remove yourself from it, step outside the box, and actually think about the polution you've been spoon-fed, you will soon realize that these people neither care for you, about you, or have any respect for the truth and the scientific method. Their agenda is their own needs; they look out for number one, all the while you and your pals are fueling the furnaces and making their wallets nice and phat!J0NEdited by AdminAsgara, : removed unnecessary extension to subtitle

Ah yes... I surely am going to miss that guy