Since we seem to have a few new creationists floating around, such as WRENCHEAD and yoyo3500, perhaps I can elicit some
feedback regarding their viewpoint on the Creation vs. Evolution debate. Although anyone is welcome to contribute and even elaborate on their opinions of why creationists are fixated on evolution, I really would like to hear from actual living, breathing creationists.
I have taken the liberty of reproducing part of my efforts from this thread, where I began wondering out loud about these questions.
Why do creationists focus their efforts against evolution? Their arguments are nearly always framed as Creation vs. Evolution, yet almost every objection applies to all of science, or at the very least to other, non-related disciplines such as astronomy, geology, cosmology, physics, thermodynamics, etc. When they bluster about the naturalism of evolution, they conveniently forget about every other branch of science that operates under these same principles. When they want disclaimers in textbooks proclaiming “it’s only a theory”, they completely ignore the theory of gravity, or the theory of relativity, and so forth. As they whine about order arising from the Big Bang and violations of the 2nd law of thermo, it is still portrayed as problems with “Evilution” and dogma from “evolutionists”. If their problem is with the whole of Science, why don’t they be honest and admit this, instead of concentrating on evolution? Is opposition to evolution sexier than calling it “Creation vs. Geology”, or “Creation vs. Astronomy” ??
I have tried to logically work this through, and I can only come up with several alternatives:[list=1][li]Creationists actually believe there is some qualitative difference between the science involved in evolution research and that of other branches. In other words, evolutionary science == BAD, other science == OK. Any issues with disciplines other than evolution are minor, yet still somehow disprove Darwin’s theory while sparing the rest of science.[/li]
[li]They really do think practically all of science is flawed, but have tactically decided that focusing on evolution will resonate with the populace and allow them to begin the assault on the entire naturalism philosophy of science, since no one wants to believe they evolved from some primitive ancestor anyway. Keeping it focused on the topic of evolution while in reality attacking all of science gives them the best chance of success.[/li]
[li]Evolution is so inherently evil that it must be stopped by any means necessary. Though fully aware the items are unrelated and from other disciplines, it doesn’t matter because all is fair in the war against evil.[/li]
[li]Having thoroughly studied their preferred religion, this has convinced them that evolution is wrong because it conflicts with their religious worldview. Regardless of whether evolution is separate from the other branches of science, it must be false since their religion is true. Any issues from other areas of science are irrelevant.[/li]
[li]Haven’t fully contemplated the reasons for their position, but just know that evolution is wrong due to (mis)guidance from others whom they trust. Since Dr. Dino, Ken Ham, the ICR website, their local rabbi, etc. is convinced of the errors in evolution, it surely must be so. If the Shepard indicates that moon dust should be 180 feet thick in order for evolution to be true, then obviously moon dust levels are part of the “theory” of evolution.[/li]
[li]Finally, they do accept the fact that evolution occurs, but they simply label it microevolution, as if this was in someway separate from evolution itself. The word evolution is reserved only for those topics they disagree with, regardless of the actual scientific discipline involved.[/list=1][/li]So creationists, which is it? Some combination of the above, or is there some other possibility I have overlooked? Why do you label the debate “Creation vs. Evolution”, yet your objections generally apply to all branches of science, or apply to something other than biology? Shouldn’t it be Creation vs. Science?