# Creationists: Strut Your Stuff **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 11, 2000, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827 "2000-03-11T20:01:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/161 "2000-03-15T02:54:00Z")
By the way, I need to give credit to James Merritt for compiling much of the previous “evidence.” ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/162 "2000-03-15T03:03:00Z")
Elvis who? ---
**Author:** ![CalifBoomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CalifBoomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalifBoomer)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/163 "2000-03-15T03:09:00Z")
Tom: > [@](#): > > The reasoning should also provide > sufficient reasons why the fossil record shows a line of species that clearly diverged > from the normal Pongid line and appeared to develop in the direction of the Hominid, > but that that line died out with no cause to be replaced (magically) by the Hominids. “The Missing Link?” This is very interesting. It seems to be a substantial break in the ‘chain of evidence’, as such should raise serious question in an rational examiner’s mind. But, alas, I already hear the response ringing in my ears. "Well, we just haven’t _found_ that link yet. _We know_ it’s out there, but so much time has passed, _etc., et yadada,_ BigDaddyD: > [@](#): > > You’re right. How silly of the scientific community to try to explain all these fossils we > do have, without waiting for the entire record to be discovered. Not a strong logical statement. Rather (and I mean no offense, just playing by the rules) an ‘aw shucks’ kind of cop-out. I mean, either the preponderance of evidence to _conclusively support_ evolution is there, or it isn’t. Again, I refer to the ‘Missing Link’ which should raise serious questions in any truly impartial inquirer’s mind. I can’t help but think that the rabid ‘anti-creationists’ (who claim to bring a ‘rational mind’ to the table) are driven by an anti-theistic philosophy, and that the creation vs. evolution debate is another forum/vehicle by which they may vent their prejudices. Also, creationist could use the same reasoning you employed in that statement, ie; the truth will be known in the fullness of time. BigDaddyD, you have referred to yourself as a Christian, so I will ask you: How do you reconcile your faith with evolutionist theory, ie; everything spontaneously created itself out of nothing until the apes arrived, and we are the progeny thereof? David: > [@](#): > > So all our common DNA with great apes is just a big coincidence, eh? Or maybe a big > joke from God? That prankster! The alleged fact that our DNA _more closely resembles that of the apes_ that that of any other creature on this earth is hardly conclusive and does not establish an undeniable link. > [@](#): > > Wrong. You bridge it with scientific hypotheses and theories. How far removed is are ‘scientific hypotheses and theories’ from beliefs drawn from an individuals personal experiences? How far do scientific suppositions go before they’re no longer ‘scientific’? > [@](#): > > Wrong again. Evolution is science. Creationism is religion. Again, only an _assertion_ Ben: Again, establishing a _similarity_ between apes and humans does not establish a link. By your logic any two species who most closely resemble each other makes for _prima facie_ evidence of a genetic relationship. This is a leap of faith. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/164 "2000-03-15T03:11:00Z")
THAT of course, is the big question. Singer, Deity, savior, alien from space, these are but a few of the many faces of Elvis for Those Who Know. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/165 "2000-03-15T03:20:00Z")
CalifBoomer said: > [@](#): > > “The Missing Link?” This is very interesting. It seems to be a substantial break in the ‘chain of evidence’, as such should raise serious question in an rational examiner’s mind. What “missing link”? Do you even know what you’re talking about, or are you just repeating standard creationist rhetoric? > [@](#): > > I mean, either the preponderance of evidence to conclusively support evolution is there, or it isn’t. And it is. Happy? > [@](#): > > Again, I refer to the ‘Missing Link’ which should raise serious questions in any truly impartial inquirer’s mind. And again I refer to your ability to quote creationist rhetoric, but not to actually add anything substantial to the discussion. > [@](#): > > I can’t help but think that the rabid ‘anti-creationists’ (who claim to bring a ‘rational mind’ to the table) are driven by an anti-theistic philosophy, and that the creation vs. evolution debate is another forum/vehicle by which they may vent their prejudices. Tell it to RTFirefly. Tell it to Polycarp (when he gets back). Tell it to Tomndebb. Tell it to the Pope. Etc. All of these folks are theists who also accept evolution. But I guess you’d rather not hear about that, eh? > [@](#): > > The alleged fact that our DNA more closely resembles that of the apes that that of any other creature on this earth is hardly conclusive and does not establish an undeniable link. “Alleged fact”? Let me guess, it’s not true, just part of an evolutionist conspiracy? Get a grip, man! Is it an “undeniable link”? Obviously not, since there are people like you who will deny it. But it is damned good evidence? Hell yes! Besides, you didn’t actually answer my question (as usual). Is it a coincidence or is your god a big prankster? I had said:“Evolution is science. Creationism is religion.” You replied: > [@](#): > > Again, only an assertion Yes, an assertion that is absolutely true and backed up by mountains of evidence, as has been explained a couple hundred times on this board before. But you’d rather ignore all the available evidence, I see. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/166 "2000-03-15T03:22:00Z")
Oh, and Boomer, what “Missing Link”? Early H. habilis are almost indistinguishable from the Australopithicines in the same era and geographic location. There are skulls that force the investigators to make a judgement call as to whether they belong to H. Habilis or H. erectus. Recently, H. ergaster has been proposed as a name for those H. erectus skulls which show resemblences to the Neandertalers, and H. heidelbergenis (check my spelling, I am writing from memory) is also called archaic H. sapiens despite its obvious erectus affinities. ## Human evolution, at least from the point of the Australopithicine bipedial chimps, is a beautiful example of the gradual changes in a lineage. What section do you feel has a gap large enough to qualify as a “Missing Link”? Dr. Fidelius, Charlatan Associate Curator Anomalous Paleontology, Miskatonic University “You cannot reason a man out of a position he did not reach through reason.” ---
**Author:** ![CalifBoomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CalifBoomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalifBoomer)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/167 "2000-03-15T03:42:00Z")
David: [quote] What “missing link”? Do you even know what you’re talking about, or are you just repeating standard creationist rhetoric? [quote] I was responding to one of your teams (BigDaddyD) statements. I did not make this up. When do not have an answer, attack your questioner?? > [@](#): > > And it is. Happy? No, you, David, have made statements acknowledging gaps in the evidence. > [@](#): > > And again I refer to your ability to quote creationist rhetoric, but not to actually add > anything substantial to the discussion. Again, David, just a spurious attack on anyone who doesn’t simply agree with you. I’m losing any respect I may have had for your purported rational thought. > [@](#): > > ell it to RTFirefly. Tell it to Polycarp (when he gets back). Tell it to Tomndebb. Tell it > to the Pope. Etc. All of these folks are theists who also accept evolution. But I guess > you’d rather not hear about that, eh? Here you seem to be saying “I don’t have a substantive answer, but because enough people say it’s true, it must be true”. You have already condemned this kind of logic, yet you employ it when it suits you. Hardly rational or consistent. > [@](#): > > Besides, you didn’t actually > answer my question (as usual). Is it a coincidence or is your god a big prankster? I most assuredly did answer your question. Learn to read, man. I said: > [@](#): > > The alleged fact that our DNA more closely resembles that of the apes that that of > any other creature on this earth is hardly conclusive and does not establish an > undeniable link. In other words, \*just because it is the **closest** thing does not mean it is the **same** thing. However, you did not answer my question, so {sigh} I will pose it once again: How far removed is are ‘scientific hypotheses and theories’ from beliefs drawn from an individuals personal experiences? How far do scientific suppositions go before they’re no longer ‘scientific’? :: ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/168 "2000-03-15T03:52:00Z")
Wow, you guys were busy last night while I was asleep! BAD NEWS: On Saturday, the Los Angeles _Daily News_ asked the question, “Do you think creationism should be taught along with evolution in public schools?” People were to answer by telephone. On Sunday they published the results: 534 Responses 68% - Yes 32% - No It was not a scientific poll. There was nothing to prevent someone from voting more than once. And this poll is not available online, so you’ll have to take my word for it. * * * When all else fails, ask Cecil. ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/169 "2000-03-15T03:57:00Z")
Ya know, Boomer, you’re starting to piss me off. I’m tired of creationist games. You avoid the question, and then when this is pointed out, claim you didn’t. What “missing link” are you talking about? You say somebody else brought it up; good, then it should be easy for you to explain. Why do you claim anti-creationists are just anti-theist and then ignore me when I point out a number of theists who accept evolution? Why is our DNA so similar to that of apes? Do you accept that, in fact, our DNA _is_ so similar to that of apes? And those are just the ones from the last message! I’d hate to have to go back and search for all the _previous_ ones you’ve been avoiding. As far as your remark about scientific theories and beliefs, it’s really a matter of definition. Scientific theories are ideas that have scientific evidence to back them up. We use the scientific method to analyze the data and see how well it stacks up against the idea. Personal experiences are just that – personal. Some may be valid data in an overall scientific experiment, depending on what the experiment is looking for, but I can hardly see how that applies to creationism and/or evolution. * * * Ignorance is Bliss. Reality is Better. ---
**Author:** ![CalifBoomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CalifBoomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalifBoomer)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/170 "2000-03-15T03:58:00Z")
Woops! I made an error (probably because I’m descended from an ape). I attributed a quote to BigDaddyD that properly belongs to tomndebb. That quote is: > [@](#): > > he reasoning should also provide > sufficient reasons why the fossil record shows a line of species that > clearly diverged > from the normal Pongid line and appeared to develop in the direction of > the Hominid, > but that that line died out with no cause to be replaced (magically) by > the Hominids. From whence I derive the “Missing Link” question. Thank you. BTW, Gaudere- Don’t really understand your diatribe 😕, but I hope you get your meds levelled out. :: ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/171 "2000-03-15T04:00:00Z")
I remember reading that Apes and humans shared more than 99% of their DNA. Among humans there is about a .2% variance. An impartial observer from another planet (let’s propose a fungi from Yuggoth) might easily make the mistake that Apes were simply a different race of human. I would say that a .8% variance between an mannish ape and an apish man is strongly suggestive of common ancestry. The alternative is a sloppy GOD who plagiarizes his own work, or worse yet the work of evolution if you subscribe to the “animals evolve but Man was created” school. I personally choose not to endorse the “God is a hack” theory. Grab Occam’s rusty butter knife and take a wack. ---
**Author:** ![CalifBoomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CalifBoomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalifBoomer)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/172 "2000-03-15T04:04:00Z")
You know, David, I’m just playing the game by the rules you established here. Logic, rational thought, evidence. If that ‘pisses you off’, and you would rather go on the attack than engage anyone who disagrees with you, fine. Continue living in self absorbed sanctimonious godless meaningless little world. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/173 "2000-03-15T04:05:00Z")
Okay, that explains it. Reading comprehension problems. Boomer, as much as I hesitate to speak for Tom~, the scenario he presented about the lineage dying out and being “magically” replaced by modern humans was an attempt to define what YOU believe. As you have stated, you do not believe that humans are the result of the selective forces that produced the rest of the life now on this Earth. The only way to reconcile your “idea” with the record of earlier primates is to have a magical extinction of all the pre-“human” hominids and replacement with “real” humans. ## I can assure you that Tom~ does not feel this is a likely scenario nor a valid explanation for the observations. Dr. Fidelius, Charlatan Associate Curator Anomalous Paleontology, Miskatonic University “You cannot reason a man out of a position he did not reach through reason.” ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/174 "2000-03-15T04:09:00Z")
Oh, sorry. I hadn’t realized this has become a “DavidB is picking on me” thread. Please ignore anything anyone might have said that may be a real contribution to the discussion. If anyone feels like discussing science later, let me know. ---
**Author:** ![CalifBoomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CalifBoomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalifBoomer)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/175 "2000-03-15T04:13:00Z")
scylla: > [@](#): > > I would say that a .8% variance between an mannish ape and an apish man is > strongly suggestive of common ancestry. There appears to be a flaw in the logic here, as it is developed not only by an alleged descendent of an ape, but presumably an intermediate step to a more intellgent being. Why should we accept the notion that our evolutionary process has yet arrived at a point where it can correctly determine its own origins? :: ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/176 "2000-03-15T04:34:00Z")
Well dude, my evolutionary inferiority has little to do with the merits of my arguments. I can use the same argument (I can’t credit it as logic) to say that since the Bible says we are all sinners and imperfect (you too) none of your arguments mean anything. The truth is that it doesn’t matter if the idea came from the Tooth Fairy. The truth stands on its own merits. If I use a screwdriver to pound in a nail does that mean the nail didn’t get pounded? I mean I, strongly believe in God, but my belief has nothing to do with logic. It’s seperate. I see no conflict. When I’m arrogant I might even say that my faith goes beyond logic. This crap you’re pulling is just denial. I hate to tell you this, but you’re making belief in God look just as bad as Pashley made straight guys look. (no offense Pash) ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/177 "2000-03-15T04:56:00Z")
I admit that I don’t know some of what you have posted, but I’ll attempt to explain most of your “bad science.” Anything I leave out I don’t understand or have no explaination or just have no comment. > [@](#): > > “Do the similarities of religions across disparate cultures constitute evidence?” No, most influenced each other. Do you see American indian religion to have significant similarities with christianity? > [@](#): > > What about all that matter that science suggests should be in the universe, only a fraction of which seems to exist or be observed (the missing matter argument) Only a fraction of which can be observed. How far do you think like will travel before losing some coherency due to dispersal of gases? We can’t see all the way across the universe, nor can be see into blackholes, super dense neutron stars, whats inside that nebula, etc etc. > [@](#): > > If it can’t be explained with rational scientific theory[refering to the big bang], what is wrong with a God hypothesis? Nothing is wrong with the God hypothesis, but So what if we can’t explain the big bang yet. Can you explain God? > [@](#): > > What about the similarities between the big bang and the event described in Genesis. I mean geez, if you took a photo of the Big bang as it happened wouldn’t the caption read “let there be light!”??? Theres an amusing argument, and a new one on me =). Anyways, thats just an interpretation. > [@](#): > > Scientific theory today bears little resemblance to scientific theory of 100 years ago, hell there have been significant changes and reversals in the last ten years… Science has changed much in a 100(well, actually try that maggot thing being about 400 years or so) You’re right, but would you call that Science? They didn’t use the scientific method back then. It was basically, I see something, I make up an explaination. That’s not science. That’s just guessing. > [@](#): > > Christian doctrine as to the creation on the other hand has at least proved stable. WHy is this constant hodge podge of changing “scientific” theory superior? Ok, that was a cheap shot. Um, Christain doctrine stable? You’ve got to be kidding me. We have proven wrong plenty of the stories in the bible, not to mention many retractions by the catholic church(ack hem… they did accept evolution.) Science changes because it proves **itself** wrong. > [@](#): > > This decay pattern is consistent with the theoretical view that there is an electrical current inside the earth which produces the magnetic field. If it’s an electical current where does it discharge to? > [@](#): > > How about the abiogenesis event. The chances of a SINGLE CELL arising spontaneously from the primordial ooze are less than 1 to the 200th power, but there are only 10 to the 80th power atoms in the universe. 1. 1^200 = 1 maybe you mean 10^200. 2. Who says an entire cell had to come into existance all at once? Go back and read my ribozyme theory post on the first page of this debate. 3. what the hell does the number of atoms have to do with anything? > [@](#): > > The pressure of oil found in sedimentary rocks is often way to high These deposits are “millions of years old” according to science , yet their pressure should have dissipated through the porous rock in 10,000 years or so. Yet it still remains high enough to create gushers. This shows that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. What about underground lakes? underground rivers? Old faithful? Not to mention Unrefined oil is EXTREMLY thick compared to water. > [@](#): > > Based on the decay of thorium and Uranium which are the only two sources for helium, there should only be enough helium in our atmosphere to last for 40,000 years or so before it bleeds off into space. Yet scientists tell us the earth is billions of years old. What is all this helium still doing in our atmosphere? BULL SHIT. H2O, 'nuff said. > [@](#): > > WHere is this wonderful mutation mechanism that makes evolution work? Almost all mutations are not beneficial to the organism. Natural selection can only select from existing genes it can’t make new ones. Who made these genes if not God 3 catagories. No mutation: normal, they have an equal chance of living or dying off. Bad mutation: they will probably die off before reproduction meaning that mutation is gone. Good mutation: They will more then likely reproduce and pass on this good mutation. Rinse, later repeat til end of time. New genes can be created via mutation,(uh, I forgot the technical term, but during meoisis of gamantes[sperm and eggs] parts of chromosomes can break off and reattach somewhere else.) the lysogenic cycle of Virii(virii of this nature INSERT their DNA into your own). > [@](#): > > The sun is shrinking at the rate of 5 feet per hour based on elips observations, that would make it less than 20,000,000 years old instead of the billions “Science” points to. HUH?! Elaborate please. > [@](#): > > Erosion should have dumped at least 30 times as mush sediment in the sea over the billions of years the oceeans existed wiping out all the landmasses if the earth was that old. About 100 tons of space dust falls onto earth per day(or was it year? I forgot) > [@](#): > > The last few appearances of Halley’s and other periodic comets show them to be > disintegrating rapidly. Based on their known periodicity this seriously disagrees with the > “scientifically determined” age of the universe. Do you know what the outside of a comet is made out of? ICE! A comet could pick up stray matter all over the place. Besides, who is to say that comet was formed by the big bang? > [@](#): > > It takes roughly 20,000 years to fgorm six inches of topsoil. The earth’s average topsoil depth is only about 7 inches. Where’s the topsoil? Packed by weight, washed off by rain etc etc. > [@](#): > > What about Polonium Halos, huh? uh, what’s That? > [@](#): > > OBserved exponential population growth I’d suppose you’d say the photosynthetic cynanobacteria explosion was also an act of God too eh? Anyway, the human population boom was caused by our superiorty to the animals–namely intelligence. > [@](#): > > Shouldn’t half of the amino acids be right-handed statistically speaking If you’re talking about the concept of right and left polarized atoms then No. The scientific explaination would be that the first cells could only metabolize one sort of atom(as it is today) and thus only synthesize that right handed atom. This led to a build up of RIGHT handed atoms and molecules. > [@](#): > > Doesn’t mitochondrial Dna show that manking evolved from one common female? Isn’t this proof of Eve? No. \\ **Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/178 "2000-03-15T05:03:00Z") I must apologize for Brother D’s abhorrent behavior. After rudely asking for the evidence for Creation “Science” several times, he actually had the gall to create a topic to give them all the room they need to present the evidence, the cad! And instead of having the good grace to accept the excuses the Creationists so kindly proffered, he actually asked them to prove their points. I think that we have tolerated enough of this nastiness. Let’s all go over to the LBMB, where they understand that facts have no place in science! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![SingleDad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9e8a1a/32.png) [@SingleDad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SingleDad)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/179 "2000-03-15T05:04:00Z")
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it. * * * Against stupidity the very gods / Themselves contend in vain. ---
**Author:** ![CalifBoomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f1d935/32.png) [@CalifBoomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalifBoomer)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2000, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827/180 "2000-03-15T05:04:00Z")
scylla: I see. When your ‘rational logic’ is exposed as vacuous pseudo-intellectualism, you have tantrums. Perhaps you are correct. We may well be the progeny of apes. :: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/creationists-strut-your-stuff/17827.md?page=10)