"It is quite remarkable that in our 21st century world, creationists can, without embarrassment, solicit debate based on simplistic superstition in a public forum."
Within the mainstream community of earth and biological scientists the debates around evolution and the age of the earth are focussed on the fine scientific detail, superseding which is an overwhelming acceptance of the fundamental principles. However, when creationists say they reject aspects of the science what they are actually doing is rejecting science itself, which of course is very unscientific. Therefore any debate on particular points of science with creationists is null and void from the onset."
Really? Science? or aspects of what someone tells you is science,but really is their belief
Well theres a real scientific mind and comment for you!
True science dosent shun debate,or other opinions outside of its own realm of current thought.It dosent try to quiet it opponents,it lets the evidence speak for itself,lets the people decide for themselves what is truth and what is not,it dosent coerce it
You should draw courage from the fact that according to you truth is determined by weight of numbers and adherants,the more people who believe what you believe must mean you are right?
True science welcomes debate and conflict of ideas,how dare a minority question the thoughts of accepted belief?In a democratic society,which allows freedom of speech and the right to an opinion?The hide of them!,and on a public forum of all places!!well i never!lol
You take the easy way out and just put a label on your opponents of the differing view,you say their veiw is religion and yours is science,the very question you ask is a straw man and misleading,both are based on belief
Science is the measurement and observation of the physical world,it dosent allow for the supernatural etc
Science is reproducable,demonstratable
Evolution,so the mainstream and main body of the community says started millions of millions of years ago,were you there to observe it?was anyone?
Life given enough time evolved out of a non living object(ie a rock)and became a living organism(of course given enough time and zeros,that makes it plausable?)Athough it has never ever been demonstrated of life coming from non life
Believe it if you will,but dont call it science,no one observed it,it is undemonstratable by scientific definition,and if someone tried to demonstrate it,it would be under controlled conditions in a lab etc,with intelligent thought behind the controlled experiment,and therefore would be a void concept,because the premise of the argument in the first place,is given enough time(of course this is always the faith part of the evolutionist) out of random kaos,matter will arrange itself out of random,into order,order out of random kaos,non living into living
Begging the colonels pardon
But dont call what someone else believes as belief
You dismiss it,because they see scientific evidence of intelligent design, contained in life on earth and believe its demonstratable to prove it,you dismiss it,as just religion or superstition,because it dosent suit what you were taught as "science".SO you put a label on it.
Life by intelligence?and design?,or life by natualistc processes?, order from random kaos,i know which one takes a damn site more faith to believe,according to the evidence
