Back when I used to discuss evolution directly with creationists more frequently, I'd often cite Answers in Genesis' page of Arguments we think creationists should not use" page. I hadn't checked this out in awhile, and forgot they have on there as an argument that is "doubtful, hence, inadvisable to use:" "Natural selection is a tautology." Yet that was just the argument given by Egnor in several posts, starting here--so even the young-earthers think Egnor has something to learn.
Typical me. I'm the one who always thinks of the snappy comeback hours after a comment is made too....
- Log in to post comments
More like this
In a number of recent posts I have remarked that when it comes to Biblical analysis, I think the young-Earthers have more going for them than is sometimes acknowledged. I have also commented that I have been generally unimpressed with the more highbrow sorts of Biblical exegesis I have seen with…
An interesting exchange took place during the Q and A of a talk entitled “Georgia Public School Board Members' Beliefs Concerning the Inclusion of Creationism in the Science Curriculum.” The speaker was Kathie Morgan of LIberty University.
The talk itself was unremarkable, even by the crushingly…
I mentioned I was back in Ohio last week. The occasion was the celebration of my grandparents' 60th wedding anniversary, but while I was in the area, a number of us from Panda's Thumb also met up south of Cincinnati to take our own tour of Answers in Genesis' Creation Museum. (Wesley has a…
There always has been tension between advocates of Young Earth Creationism (such as Ken Ham and Henry Morris) and the ID movement. While the former believe that ID supporters should actively support Biblical principles, the latter refuse to disassociate themselves from a young earth position as…
Now if only AiG will change their page to read "Arguments we think creationists should not use: ALL OF THEM."
Typical me. I'm the one who always thinks of the snappy comeback hours after a comment is made too....
The French have the perfect phrase for that feeling: L'esprit de l'escalier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L'esprit_de_l'escalier
The AIG page is atypical for cranks in general, who mostly ignore
views by competing cranks. What makes it atypical is scale. AIG
is attempting to cull the less successful arguments. If an argument
is easily refuted with common sense evidence, then it looks bad.
They want success in their propaganda campaign.
Egnor's pretty dumb on evolution and "materialism", even by creationist standards. Witness his latest comments about altruism. It's rather telling that the DI is so desperate for sciencey sounding supporters that they're willing to promote him so heavily.