(1725)  Mon 17 Jul 95 19:06
By: Fredric Rice
To: All
Re: How Creationists act
St:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@EID:36b8 1ef198d3
@MSGID: 1:102/890.666@FidoNet 6312833b
@PID: FM 2.02
[...cut from SKEPTIC, originally from me ...]

_Every_ debate between Creationists and scientists which were constrained to
the dictates of scientific method have been soundly won by the scientist(s.)
There haven't been a "series of hundreds of debates" as there is nothing to
debate and no one with a real job bothers.

kp> I have never seen a creationist ask to undergo a series of debates
kp> with a scientist (specifically an evolutionary scientist).

They refuse outright when scientists set the rules and locations; that is,
when science is being discussed rather than cultism.

kp> I have heard of many one time only requests,
kp> with the topic to be announced.

What Creationists do is troll for scientists who will agree to 'debate' their
cultism inside of churches or arenas specifically filled by the Creationistly
gullible:  Christians.  Sadly some scientists, knowing that they have the
truth and science on their side, agree without considering the tactics
employed by the Creationists.

When a scientist agrees to 'debate' a cultist the Creationists responsible for
soliciting his or her participation examines the areas or venue of the
scientist and then searches for Creationists which are well-versed in areas
the scientist is not likely to be well versed.  Then the Creationists
carefully steer the 'debate' along the lines the Creationist is well versed
in.

In FidoNet, as you've probably seen, when a Creationist makes the mistake of
opening his yap and uttering some bit of occultism, there is bound to be
someone (or a couple of dozen someones) who is well versed in the subject to
debunk the fool immediately and fully.  In this respect the Creationist still
gets to pick the arena for the debate (they walk into SKEPTIC or HolySmoke)
yet they get _soundly_ and _repeatedly_ debunked.

Part of the Creationist dishonesty is to constantly ignore the truth so that
the better educated expend time and resources constantly debunking the
cultist.  All a Creationist need to is say, "is not" and the better educated
expend 100 lines showing exactly why "it is so."  When that's done, the
Creationist glibly responds, "that's contrary to the second law of
thermodynamics" and the better educated once again expends 100 lines
explaining to the cultist why he's mistaken.  This continues and, for every
one-liner the Creationist offers, the better educated busts hirself up
correcting the cultist -- when there is not even any intention of actually
learning anything.

After the better educated explain Brownian Motion, Newton's three laws or
motion, what the thermodynamic laws actually say, what the fossil record
actually records and what it means, what general relativity means for
spectroscopy and beta decay et al. the Creationist is free to start at the top
with an "is not."

Creationists are ideologically constrained to adopt this methodology, to lie,
and to willfully ignore all the scientific evidence.  They are also
constrained by their ideologies not to present any honest answers to the
questions which the better educated might ask along the way.

kp> And there has been no "series of hundreds of debates", so I can
kp> only assume you are saying this to mislead the reader.

"Appleon" is a liar.  All of this has been explained to him countless times.

---
 * Origin: Mary _had_ a little lamb. (1:102/890.666)
SEEN-BY: 102/890 943

@PATH: 102/890
