Would anyone suggest any good sites that deconstruct creationist arguments against evolution? Especially stuff like http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp
Talk.Origins is generally considered the first line of defense against creationism around these parts.
BTW, I think it’s neat that Angelo Mosca lent his image for the cover of the Chick tract.
I’ll bet they’ll have plenty of ideas over in Great Debates. 
Stephen Jay Gould (he died in 2002) was/is one of America’s leading paleontologists. He also was a damn good writer, especially to lay-men!
Because he made some innovations in the evolution theory, he found himself abused by the creationist’ movement as “the paleontologist who proved evolution was wrong”.
Enraged, in his own very eloquent and humourous way, he wrote a few brilliant essays against creationism. The essays were published in bookform, fo instance “Hen’s teeth and horses’ toes!”. Amazon sells Goulds books.
For instance, Gould describes the two trials (Scopes I, which happened I think in the 1940’s, and Scopes II, in the 1980’s) where “equal time for creationism/evolutieon in schools” was tried. In both cases, the advocates of creationism lost the trial, but the detalis of the trial are hilarious and informative!
Gould himself was an expert-wittness in Scopes II.
From his book, I also learned that the Pope John-Paul actually has admitted that the evolution-theory is not conflicting with Christian faith. Most protestants accept the Pope as an authority figure to some extent, but this remark has been “under rug swept”…
Well, no, actually. There are a lot of Christian denominations that have no problems with evolutionary theory. It’s only certain groups, which take a very literal interpretation of the Bible, which disagree with it. Of course, they tend to be the most vocal…
Check out this thread for a useful discussion: Can Christians believe in the Big Bang?.
That comic(al) creationists(aren’t they all?) mentions polystrate fossils which could be explained by 19th century scientists and have a natual explanation. You can find a more detailed explanation at talkorgins here. The comic creationsits also says something similiar to Evolution being faith based which is absurd, since he cites (as we know, know bolded in the link as well)subatomic particles, not realizing you must also have faith to believe in those if you apply the same standard. I am pretty sure the whale’s land ancestor was found and and documented and there was more than one Neanderthal skeleton found to prove their existence(parts of 350). I also find the obvious use of propaganda in that comic amusing, giving a white light to the background of the creationist and a dark background to the evillutionist:rolleyes:.
I never heard the creationist gleuons or circular reasoning arguments though, anybody care to explain those? Arrggh, I need to study up too.
Hmmm… link to polystrate fossils isn’t working, I think a link can be found in the main FAQ of talkorgins though. There are two specific stories and a simple explanation. I’ve heard huge lists sputtered off on Christian radio, all explainable.
I believe in creationism;
Believe-not disagree because of what scientists have said.
IMHO
Well, does “believing in creationism” mean believing that “God created the Universe”, or does it entail disagreeing with the geologists about how old the Universe is, disagreeing with the biologists about human ancestry, and other scientific questions?
Its bothersome enough that after the reformation thousands of christian and psuedochristian sects have developed. The christian world cant get its act together on the tenets of its religion, and they expect scientists to just keel over on their beleifs (various as they are) on creation?
Actually, science (unlike religion, or for that matter philosophy or politics or art) does tend to “get its act together” on scientific questions. You don’t see any more scientists who insist on that Old Time Phlogistonism, or stubbornly adhere to the fundamentals of Orthodox Geocentrism (and who detest those Brahean heretics almost more than they do the infidel Old-School Copernicans, who in turn won’t speak to the Keplerian Reformed Heliocentrists). Of course there are areas that are still controversial, but the whole idea is to settle the controversies, and over time this happens in more and more areas, including in such questions as “How old is Earth and the Solar System?” or “Did all existing species (including humans) evolve over time from other forms of life?”
I have two FAQs that might be of interest:
I believe God took the earth (no matter how old it was) cleaned it off, created animals plants, humans in 6 days.
I have no scientific proof of this; its my belief.
A matter of faith.
vanilla, do you also believe that the earth is flat, that sun revolves around the earth and that the sky is a solid dome? The Bible says those things too, you know.
Sorry for the hijack but I must ask. I won’t challenge your belief in a biblical six day creation as it serves no purpose here, but where did “cleaned it off” come from?
Slight hijack-
What’s chick trying to tell us in his tract? That professor’s are raving nutcases?
I think Chick’s ultimate aim is to show evolutionary scientists as rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth demagogues, and thereby make them look foolish.
He doesn’t seem to realize that that’s how most of us see him.
Can we get chapter and verse on all of those please? especially the flat earth one - I’m not a creationist and I’m not going to argue in defence of a literal interpretation of the Bible, but I think it’s a little strong to say that the Bible says the earth is flat.
Certainly it is easy to argue that it implies those things, or that those were the prevailing views of the human authors and readers…
Or maybe I’m wrong and you know of a verse where it says straight out that the earth is flat as a matzo?