Lord Ashtar, I must say that I find your stance on this issue to be puzzling. It just seems like you have this big thread discussing whether creationists are being blacklisted for a minority of extremists, but when I make good on my offer to prove that even the respectable creationist experts are dishonest, you abruptly lose interest in the thread.
I asked you elsewhere what you make of the claims regarding Behe’s lies, and you said:
**
If Behe points to a number of textbooks and claims that they don’t discuss evolution, when, in fact, some of them even devote entire chapters to the subject, that doesn’t seem like a particularly technical issue to me. Certainly it’s less technical than questions of whether evolution is valid, which you felt more than competent to decide “one way or the other.”
Could you explain further why you don’t feel like you have the expertise to decide whether Behe is a liar? This is, after all, an important issue. You yourself said, as I remember, that it is important to take dishonest creationists to task.
Lord Ashtar, I must say that I find your stance on this issue to be puzzling. It just seems like you have this big thread discussing whether creationists are being blacklisted for a minority of extremists, but when I make good on my offer to prove that even the respectable creationist experts are dishonest, you abruptly lose interest in the thread.
I asked you elsewhere what you make of the claims regarding Behe’s lies, and you said:
**
If Behe points to a number of textbooks and claims that they don’t discuss evolution, when, in fact, some of them even devote entire chapters to the subject, that doesn’t seem like a particularly technical issue to me. Certainly it’s less technical than questions of whether evolution is valid, which you felt more than competent to decide “one way or the other.”
Could you explain further why you don’t feel like you have the expertise to decide whether Behe is a liar? This is, after all, an important issue. You yourself said, as I remember, that it is important to take dishonest creationists to task.
Ben, I would say to not try and take this personally, but I fear you will anyway. So…
Please feel free to re-read the OP, and then see where the discussion went. This thread is an excellent example of a tangent. I wanted to discuss why it is that a few people can make an entire group look bad, and it ended up becoming a discussion of Evolution vs. Creationism. This is something which I am simply not prepared to discuss. I don’t know enough about biology, and all the proofs I have seen in this thread for evolution are scientific and biological proofs. I can’t debate against this, nor can I agree with it. I don’t have enough information.
I did, however, come to a decision. I choose to not care one way or the other. I believe this universe and everything in it, including you and I, to have been created by God. Therefore, I am a creationist. This does not mean that God didn’t use evolution to create us. He could have manipulated the gene mutations, or He could have just been the spark which began abiogenesis and, knowing how it would end up, just let it flow. Either way, I still believe that He had His hand in it. So, debating the subject of evolution vs. creationism has become a waste of my time, as I have determined that it wouldn’t affect my belief structure one way or the other. Since I have made up my mind, what would be the point of debating it further?
My point in bringing up Behe was just to show that there are other viewpoints out there. While he might not be able to prove any or all of his points (be it due to lack of evidence or that he is simply wrong), he at least is trying to find another alternative. I don’t like the idea of either group A or group B being the only options, as I don’t believe that to be the case in the matter of the origin of the universe. How can either side be sure to have it exactly right?
Ben, it seems that you suddenly find me to be highly insulting. That’s too bad. I am interested in discussing several things with you, such as why you believe Jeremiah to be a false prophet, and what exactly is the chip you seem to have on your shoulder against Christianity. However, my understanding is that the rules of this forum dictate that you must stay on topic within each thread. I have been attempting to do that. When you said something which I believed to be off topic, I asked you to start a new thread with the intention of joining you and discussing it. You chose not to do so. So I started it, since I decided that I wanted to discuss it. You can either choose to participate or remain silent and allow me to make the assumption that you are a troll simply looking to disrupt what I feel have been very interesting discussions. Your choice. I hope you choose to back up your assertions.
Your original question was answered several times. The non-extremist religious get lumped in with all the loonies because they simply refuse to take a strong stand against their looniness. Instead we get a bunch of half-hearted justifications and equivocation.
If main-stream religious leaders don’t like to be included with the fringes then they need to continually respond when outrageous claims are made and they need to do it often and without hedging.
As far as the hijack to creationism is concerned, upon review of the posts, it looks to me like you’re as responsible as anyone.
—I wanted to discuss why it is that a few people can make an entire group look bad, and it ended up becoming a discussion of Evolution vs. Creationism. This is something which I am simply not prepared to discuss.—
But your paradigmatic example was creationists. So how can we possibly address the issue of whether creationists are being unfairly blacklisted unless we examine the issue of what creationists are actually saying?
I would have to agree. Lord Ashtar is simply weaselling, because his argument has collapsed. I (among others, IIRC) made the argument that our disrespect for creationism was not based just in “extremists” like Chick, but in the dishonesty (and stupidity) of creationist pundits in general:
**
To which Lord Ashtar replied:
**
When I presented proof that Behe is a liar, Ashtar simply dropped the thread. When I raised the issue again, Ashtar changed his story:
**
Which is, of course, beside the point. Maybe he feels Behe is to be lauded for presenting an alternative viewpoint, but Ashtar is completely weaselling around the fact that he specifically presented Behe in response to the challenge to find an honest creationist pundit. Discussion of Behe is, therefore, not a hijack at all, but completely relevant to the OP!
Yes, well, I tend to take it personally when I’m dealing with someone who falsely accuses me.
**
I must say, I find your audacity to be remarkable. I’ve told you several times that I have a problem with the fact that you have a tendency to falsely accuse people. This wouldn’t have been such a big deal, were it not for the fact that you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge my complaint. If you had simply apologized, admitted you made a mistake, and refrained from doing it again, I would have given you the benefit of the doubt that you’re discussing in good faith. But instead, even now you try to portray this as being some sort of mysterious animus which I have against you for no apparent reason! What incredible cheek! I wonder how you’re going to explain all this to Jesus when he points out that nine commandments aren’t enough.
**
Then withdraw your false accusations, and apologize for them. Why should I even have to explain that?
**
Yes, and you tried to jerk me around by putting me in the hotseat.
Ah- so if I choose not to participate in your discussion any further, that means I’m a troll. What an utterly childish attempt at manipulation! You can’t force me to be your personal argument monkey by starting a GD thread directed at me, so you try another tack: if I don’t participate, you’ll assume I’m a troll. Go ahead and believe what you want. Why should I care? All the reasonable people here know full well that I have no obligation to talk to you.
On the other hand, you do have an obligation to retract your false accusations. If you don’t retract them, then I’m not sure I’ll be the only one who decides that you’re just another nine-commandment christian.
Fine then, Ben. Feel free to take pride in the fact that my argument collapsed. I do not feel like continuing this. Make whatever assumptions you wish from this. Have a nice life.