# creationism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 28, 2002, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305 "2002-12-28T04:44:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![montezuma999](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/838e76/32.png) [@montezuma999](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/montezuma999)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/61 "2003-01-05T00:35:53Z")
It is certainly refreshing to engage in high level, intelligent discussion as opposed to the more conventional internet fodder of “who would you want to date more” and endless flame wars. I thank you for raising the average intelligence of the Internet, if even by a small fraction. ---
**Author:** ![Azael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a8b319/32.png) [@Azael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Azael)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/62 "2003-01-05T01:30:00Z")
Welcome to the board **montezuma999**! ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/63 "2003-01-05T02:11:10Z")
**’Nilla** , I did not mean that as a criticism of how you’re raising your son, but as an example of the “conflict of data” problem that kids (including your son) are apt to run into when they confront science and religious doctrine and they appear to contradict. I’m sorry if you took it as a judgment on you personally. ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/64 "2003-01-05T16:16:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ruby\_rabscuttle \* > \*\*Thank you for your clarification on what a “day” meant in Hebrew. I really do appreciate both of your research of the subject of Day. I may come back for more since I had struggled with the Evolution Creationish Debate in my late teens/early 20s… I need to look into the first of John I since there is something there that refers back to Genesis I that might have confused me. as you can tell… i’m new to communicating via this medium… i have an interesting group of friends, evangelicals, calvinists, antheists, mostly agnosticsetc… so this subject isn’t spoken much of outside of the town in my own little mushy brain Yah, it’s convenient to say a Day was not 24 hours, but I still lean toward the theory of epochs. will we ever really know. \*\* Hello Ruby, You will also find some lively discussion of this topic here: [http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php](http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php) Please ignore the Humo(u)r Forum, unless you enjoy jokes, parodies and satire. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/65 "2003-01-05T16:27:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by montezuma999 \* > \*\*It is certainly refreshing to engage in high level, intelligent discussion as opposed to the more conventional internet fodder of “who would you want to date more” and endless flame wars. I thank you for raising the average intelligence of the Internet, if even by a small fraction. \*\* Yes. It is refreshing. For high level discussion of this topic you can also check here: [http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=6](http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=6) Some of the posts are over my head, but it’s a great place to learn about the topic and it’s a very professional environment. They don’t tolerate any nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/66 "2003-01-05T16:40:34Z")
**GOM** -I could be mistaken, but aren’t both of those messageboards ID boards? ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/67 "2003-01-05T16:41:57Z")
Here’s the C vs. E debate from another angle: [http://www.iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=58](http://www.iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=58) This is from the internet infidels discussion forum. ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/68 "2003-01-05T16:52:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Meatros \* > \*\ ***GOM** -I could be mistaken, but aren’t both of those messageboards ID boards? \*\* Yes. You will find there are IDists, evolutionists and creationists all posting there. You get a more reasonable balance when all sides can participate, imo. It seemed like one or both of them might be helpful, or interesting, to some of the posters here. There have been a number of different links posted in this thread already, if you are objecting to my posting two links. I can’t quite tell… ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/69 "2003-01-05T16:57:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GOM \* > \*\*Yes. You will find there are IDists, evolutionists and creationists all posting there. You get a more reasonable balance when all sides can participate, imo. It seemed like one or both of them might be helpful, or interesting, to some of the posters here. There have been a number of different links posted in this thread already, if you are objecting to my posting two links. I can’t quite tell… \*\* No, not really objecting, I was curious because as I said they were both ID websites. I haven’t had that much experience with them, so I’m not sure as to if they are well balanced or not. If they are, then that’s fine and if they aren’t that’s fine too. I figured I might as well post a link that isn’t an ID site, in case it isn’t well balanced. ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/70 "2003-01-05T17:07:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Meatros \* > \*\*No, not really objecting, I was curious because as I said they were both ID websites. I haven’t had that much experience with them, so I’m not sure as to if they are well balanced or not. If they are, then that’s fine and if they aren’t that’s fine too. I figured I might as well post a link that isn’t an ID site, in case it isn’t well balanced. \*\* Okay. Sounds fair to me… 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![GOM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/5f9b8f/32.png) [@GOM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GOM)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/71 "2003-01-05T17:11:02Z")
Ooops. I just looked at your link. You consider infidels a balanced site? I haven’t been there, but that’s not the reputation of infidels I have heard… For example, I doubt I would be welcome there. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/72 "2003-01-05T20:20:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GOM \* > \*\*Ooops. > > I just looked at your link. You consider infidels a balanced site? I haven’t been there, but that’s not the reputation of infidels I have heard… > > For example, I doubt I would be welcome there. \*\* I was balancing out the ID boards you posted, I wasn’t trying to present the infidels as a well balanced site. FWIW, I think the straightdope is one of the most fair and well balanced site out there. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2003, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/73 "2003-01-05T20:22:02Z")
I would just like to add that I think the infidels are more balanced than some other web boards I’ve [seen](http://pub7.ezboard.com/bcbbb) . ---
**Author:** ![Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/df788c/32.png) [@Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2003, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/74 "2003-01-06T01:57:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GOM \* > \*\*You get a more reasonable balance when all sides can participate, imo. \*\* > [@](#): > > \*\* > I just looked at your link. You consider infidels a balanced site? I haven’t been there, but that’s not the reputation of infidels I have heard… > > For example, I doubt I would be welcome there. > \*\* GOM, you criticise the Infidels messageboard without having seen it, on the presumption that creationists aren’t welcome there. Would you be willing to criticise the ICR messageboard on the same grounds? After all, they not only forbid any evolutionist to post there, they also edit posts that are pro-evolution (or even ones that ask too many questions about creationism) into pro-creationist hurrahs, without even indicating they are doing so. I’d also like to ask a second question. Obviously the Infidels site isn’t balanced, any more than, say, a pro-Christian site is balanced. It’s meant to present a particular viewpoint. But does that necessarily mean that the information there is unreliable? I find that fundamentalists generally dismiss the information at the Infidels site as being unreliable, but I have never seen anyone substantiate such claims. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2003, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/75 "2003-01-06T02:10:15Z")
Science isn’t _supposed_ to be balanced. Evolution is a _fact_ and that’s the end of it. There’s nothing to debate. Creationist and ID arguments are demonstrably false. They merit no more “fair” consideration than a flat earth debate. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2003, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/76 "2003-01-06T03:09:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*Science isn’t _supposed_ to be balanced. Evolution is a _fact_ and that’s the end of it. There’s nothing to debate. Creationist and ID arguments are demonstrably false. They merit no more “fair” consideration than a flat earth debate. \*\* I totally agree with you on all your points. I did have a question: Is ID and Creationistic _type_ research a total waste of time? The problem I see is that some creation researchers use dishonesty in their research. Is it actually possible to try to search (scientifically) for God in the universe? ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2003, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/77 "2003-01-06T03:10:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ben \* > \*\*Would you be willing to criticise the ICR messageboard on the same grounds? After all, they not only forbid any evolutionist to post there, they also edit posts that are pro-evolution (or even ones that ask too many questions about creationism) into pro-creationist hurrahs, without even indicating they are doing so. > \*\* That can’t be true, can it? That’s a hideous practice for a “scientific” MB.:eek: ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2003, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/78 "2003-01-06T03:54:32Z")
> [@](#): > > _Meatros_ > I totally agree with you on all your points. I did have a question: Is ID and Creationistic type research a total waste of time? The problem I see is that some creation researchers use dishonesty in their research. Is it actually possible to try to search (scientifically) for God in the universe? Of course it’s possible to search for God. As long as the methodology is honest and empirical. The problem comes if you presuppose a result, and then skew, misinterpret or misrepresent the evidence to fit that presupposition. Scientists have been guilty of that too, but Science is a self-correcting discipline. Religion is not. BTW, you didn’t ask, but I don’t have a problem with _theistic_ evolution. Looking for transcendent implications in the physical world is perfectly noble and defensible-- as long as such an endeavor is _honest_ about the physical world. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2003, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/79 "2003-01-06T05:12:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GOM \* > **You will find there are IDists, evolutionists and creationists all posting there.** From what I’ve seen, IDists are nothing more than Creationists who’ve taken up a certain not-dead-yet-argument of the month. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2003, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305/80 "2003-01-06T05:26:45Z")
> [@](#): > > Science isn’t supposed to be balanced. Evolution is a fact and that’s the end of it. There’s nothing to debate. Creationist and ID arguments are demonstrably false. They merit no more “fair” consideration than a flat earth debate. Bleeah! (But don’t think I’ve gone off the deep end and joined ICR!! :)) Evolution is a **theory**. But that’s not denigrating its status. Facts are data. Theories are tested hypothesis to _make sense_ of the data. Don’t fall into the Creationist trap of thinking that “theory” means something _less_ than “fact” – it means something **more**. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationism/145305.md?page=5)