How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-01-2014, 07:16 PM
How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
How to debate a creationist. Its not a good idea to debate these people in the first place but when it comes up in a conversation or because someone wants to butt into the conversation your having then you're going to have to be prepared. There are two types of creationist. The first type is rare but they are the ones that really want to understand what evolution is and want to know what people actually says about it. These guys also may end up becoming a scientific mind once they understand how it works. All you can do with these creationist is show them evidence objectively. The other type are the conspiracy believing, gay hating, science hating, and lying creationist. These will be most likely to butt into your conversation when they here about evolution. Instead I'm going to get into these guys into more detail because they're many things that you must do to at least get these guys off your back and very rarely make them realize the folly of creationist.

The first step is not to debate Evolution with these people. They don't want to learn about it evolution at all. They want to twist your words and push their faults onto you. Debating evolution with a creationist is a bad idea. If it does come up tell them that's not part of the topic. Also when they talk about the big bang tell them that has nothing to do with evolution either and that too is not the topic. What is the more important topic. The flood myth.

The second step is to go for the flood and other bible scientific inaccuracies. A creationist true foundation isn't the fall, it's the flood. The flood is the only way that creationist can come up with excuses to ignore scientific evidence. Without it there little myth gets curbed stomped by the foot of reality. Sorry for the violent expression but reality is that brutal to myths like the bible anyway. To show the folly of the flood show evidence. For example population bottlenecks. A population bottleneck is what happens when a population becomes low enough that the genetic diversity ends up lowering.(1) When you bring this up show them how it's impossible to get every animal ever alive to diversify with only seven of every clean kind and bird and two of every other kind of animal in 6000 years, when a population bottleneck of that caliber would ruin it. That's just one example. But a creationist might say that they have the science and that we look at it from and evolution based view. This is the next step

The next step is to show them their point of view is not science. Show them the steps science must take,(2) and that it is supposed to be falsifiable.(3) Also show that science will put away any theory that is falsified and when new evidence comes and it contradicts what we know and it is closer to the truth then what previously believed, we will reject what we used to believe and study the new evidence that has appeared. If creationism doesn't fit any of these it is not science. Speaking of science you must demand papers.

The next step is to demand the paper with the evidence. When they make a claim like fossils can only be formed by water in a catastrophic event, then ask for the paper that says that. If they can't even lead you to a scientific website that shows them right, then you can show them "That if they can't show it, they can't know it,"(Aron Ra's quote by the way). They might yell conspiracy but then you must show them the next step.

This step you must show them the flaw in there logic. For example when they talk about the Smithsonian hiding giant fossils, replace giant with transitional fossil and Smithsonian with Answers in Genesis. If they can see how stupid it is then tell them that the logic they're using for giants is just as bad. If they can't provide evidence for this then look at Aron Ra's quote in the paragraph above. There is one more step that I must go through.

The last step is to show them that they aren't like you when if comes to evidence. For example when the say same evidence different conclusions, tell them the folly of said thinking. We don't look at the same evidence. We look at it objectively and will be able to question every evidence we hear. They however, will try to use transitional fossils to "debunk" transitional fossils. If they knew about the traits that a transitional fossil shows, then they would (hopefully) realize that they don't look at the same evidence, the ignore evidence so they can live in their delusion.


When creationist like this appear and force you into this, I hope my steps can help. Again it's better to not debate them at all. When you do debate them pressure what they believe instead of showing them science they'll never except. Use the science they do except(population bottlenecks for one) and show that the science they do excepts contradict a literal bible. If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said please tell me. Thanks for readingThumbsup



1.http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIID3Bottlenecks.shtml

2.http://www.oakton.edu/user/4/billtong/eas100/scientificmethod.htm

3.http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/principle_of_falsification.html

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 07:32 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  How to debate a creationist. Its not a good idea to debate these people in the first place but when it comes up in a conversation or because someone wants to butt into the conversation your having then you're going to have to be prepared. There are two types of creationist. The first type is rare but they are the ones that really want to understand what evolution is and want to know what people actually says about it. These guys also may end up becoming a scientific mind once they understand how it works. All you can do with these creationist is show them evidence objectively. The other type are the conspiracy believing, gay hating, science hating, and lying creationist. These will be most likely to butt into your conversation when they here about evolution. Instead I'm going to get into these guys into more detail because they're many things that you must do to at least get these guys off your back and very rarely make them realize the folly of creationist.

The first step is not to debate Evolution with these people. They don't want to learn about it evolution at all. They want to twist your words and push their faults onto you. Debating evolution with a creationist is a bad idea. If it does come up tell them that's not part of the topic. Also when they talk about the big bang tell them that has nothing to do with evolution either and that too is not the topic. What is the more important topic. The flood myth.

The second step is to go for the flood and other bible scientific inaccuracies. A creationist true foundation isn't the fall, it's the flood. The flood is the only way that creationist can come up with excuses to ignore scientific evidence. Without it there little myth gets curbed stomped by the foot of reality. Sorry for the violent expression but reality is that brutal to myths like the bible anyway. To show the folly of the flood show evidence. For example population bottlenecks. A population bottleneck is what happens when a population becomes low enough that the genetic diversity ends up lowering.(1) When you bring this up show them how it's impossible to get every animal ever alive to diversify with only seven of every clean kind and bird and two of every other kind of animal in 6000 years, when a population bottleneck of that caliber would ruin it. That's just one example. But a creationist might say that they have the science and that we look at it from and evolution based view. This is the next step

The next step is to show them their point of view is not science. Show them the steps science must take,(2) and that it is supposed to be falsifiable.(3) Also show that science will put away any theory that is falsified and when new evidence comes and it contradicts what we know and it is closer to the truth then what previously believed, we will reject what we used to believe and study the new evidence that has appeared. If creationism doesn't fit any of these it is not science. Speaking of science you must demand papers.

The next step is to demand the paper with the evidence. When they make a claim like fossils can only be formed by water in a catastrophic event, then ask for the paper that says that. If they can't even lead you to a scientific website that shows them right, then you can show them "That if they can't show it, they can't know it,"(Aron Ra's quote by the way). They might yell conspiracy but then you must show them the next step.

This step you must show them the flaw in there logic. For example when they talk about the Smithsonian hiding giant fossils, replace giant with transitional fossil and Smithsonian with Answers in Genesis. If they can see how stupid it is then tell them that the logic they're using for giants is just as bad. If they can't provide evidence for this then look at Aron Ra's quote in the paragraph above. There is one more step that I must go through.

The last step is to show them that they aren't like you when if comes to evidence. For example when the say same evidence different conclusions, tell them the folly of said thinking. We don't look at the same evidence. We look at it objectively and will be able to question every evidence we hear. They however, will try to use transitional fossils to "debunk" transitional fossils. If they knew about the traits that a transitional fossil shows, then they would (hopefully) realize that they don't look at the same evidence, the ignore evidence so they can live in their delusion.


When creationist like this appear and force you into this, I hope my steps can help. Again it's better to not debate them at all. When you do debate them pressure what they believe instead of showing them science they'll never except. Use the science they do except(population bottlenecks for one) and show that the science they do excepts contradict a literal bible. If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said please tell me. Thanks for readingThumbsup



1.http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/IIID3Bottlenecks.shtml

2.http://www.oakton.edu/user/4/billtong/eas100/scientificmethod.htm

3.http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/principle_of_falsification.html

That's nice, except for one small problem. They don't believe in science.

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes diddo97's post
26-01-2014, 07:34 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
Yabut, the flood isn't creationism.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 07:42 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
(26-01-2014 07:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  Yabut, the flood isn't creationism.

Wait what? Are you saying the global flood or regular floods? please expalinHuh

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 08:11 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
Late @ night here so I'm going to bed - no time for in-depth response.

See my post on the scientific method thread - its a good place to start by demonstrating some of the most impressive success in deep explanatory science (not just predictive descriptions)
eg the explanatory power of the periodic table of elements. I personally found this useful when leaving orthodoxy myself because I had to give respect for some of the most profound discoveries in science and methods used (rational analysis, data collection, coherence, mathematical elegance, concept of falsification etc.)
Eg Einsteins prediction of gravitational bending of light precisely tested and easily falsifiable if he was wrong in the Eddington's 1919 experiment with the solar eclipse - it is mindboggling to know haw mathematics & empirical data can combine to form rational evidence based scientific explanations.
This can already put "faith" into doubt or at least not a virtue compared to hard investigative analytical work to collect evidence and build a coherent view of how reality really is.

The above are non confrontational - it doesn't hurt someone's biblical beliefs if light bends around the Sun or that adding an additional proton makes another element.
- but they do provide profound respect, something must be going on that the scientific method is discovering not available from any prophet or biblical source. The Biblical method fails here abysmally.

THEN:
In my experience the Biblical Noach flood always bothered me even during the height of my orthodox years - even when happily teaching intelligent design and anti evolution rhetoric. It has to be the easiest & most ridiculous to expose myth unlike any other. It is just SO CRAZY by todays scientific knowledge but understandable why bronze age writers believed this considering they knew virtually nothing about the world beyond the locality of their region.
It is also understandable that large scale local flooding could have been the kernel to inspire such stories whether of the Euphrates/Tigris or if we believe a tradition passed down from much earlier such as flooding of the black sea at end of the ice age.

Discussing Big Bang cosmology is more tricky, its a difficult topic and we don't know much about what happened in the first minute. So any weakness or gap will immediately face the "God did it" bandwagon.

Discussing lack of evidence of the exodus is also tricky because you may face the "lack of evidence doesn't prove evidence of not happening" bandwagon and you can face all sorts of conspiracies that the Egyptians didn't record any of the history due to not recording their defeats only victories (not actually true)
Of course the Exodus would leave plenty evidence because population sizes claimed are insanely huge - but again it quickly gets nitty gritty and conspiracy lead.

So the Noach flood story and for that matter the tower of Babel are excellent places to start.

Once the cleaver slices through an entire chapter of the Bible then the rest of the Biblical edifice is more vulnerable to falsification including the New Testament.
The Quran also mistakenly plagiarized the Noach flood and whilst somewhat dampened down (watered down ! ) with some scholars trying to make it look like a local flood - it still commits flaws easy to expose.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Baruch's post
26-01-2014, 08:18 PM (This post was last modified: 26-01-2014 08:25 PM by Vosur.)
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said please tell me. Thanks for readingThumbsup
You can find plenty of that below. Drinking Beverage

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Its not a good idea to debate these people in the first place, but when it comes up in a conversation or because someone wants to butt into the conversation your having, then you're going to have to be prepared.
*It's
*you're

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The first type is rare, but they are the ones that really want to understand what evolution is and want to know what people actually says about it.
*say

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  All you can do with these creationist is show them evidence objectively.
*creationists
*showing

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The other type are the conspiracy-believing, gay-hating, science-hating, and lying creationist.
*is

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  These will be most likely to butt into your conversation when they here about evolution.
*hear

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Instead, I'm going to get into these guys into more detail because they're many things that you must do to at least get these guys off your back and very rarely make them realize the folly of creationist.
*there are
*creationism

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The first step is not to debate Evolution with these people.
*evolution

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  They don't want to learn about it evolution at all.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Also, when they talk about the big bang, tell them that has nothing to do with evolution either and that too is not the topic.
*Big Bang
*that that (x2)

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  What is the more important topic?
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The second step is to go for the flood and other bible scientific inaccuracies.
*biblical

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  A creationist true foundation isn't the fall, it's the flood.
*creationist's

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The flood is the only way that creationist can come up with excuses to ignore scientific evidence.
*a

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Without it, there little myth gets curbed stomped by the foot of reality.
*their
*and

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Sorry for the violent expression, but reality is that brutal to myths like the bible anyway.
*Bible

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  They might yell "conspiracy", but then you must show them the next step.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  This step you must show them the flaw in there logic.
*At this
*their

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  For example, when they talk about the Smithsonian hiding giant fossils, replace "giant" with "transitional fossil" and "Smithsonian" with "Answers in Genesis".
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The last step is to show them that they aren't like you when if comes to evidence.
*it

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  For example, when the say "same evidence, different conclusions", tell them the folly of said thinking.
*they

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If they knew about the traits that a transitional fossil shows, then they would (hopefully) realize that they don't look at the same evidence, the ignore evidence so they can live in their delusion.
*they

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  When creationist like this appear and force you into this, I hope my steps can help.
*creationists

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Again, it's better to not debate them at all.
When you do debate them, pressure what they believe instead of showing them science they'll never except.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Use the science they do except (population bottlenecks for one) and show that the science they do excepts contradict a literal bible.
*accept (x2)
*contradicts
*Bible

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said, please tell me. Thanks for reading. Thumbsup
Fixed.

Just another morning in Germany. [Image: vG3fPew.gif]

[Image: Y5tGBer.jpg]

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Vosur's post
26-01-2014, 08:21 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
(26-01-2014 07:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  Yabut, the flood isn't creationism.

"Creationism" is a messy term because there is a spectrum of creationists from young Earth to Old Earth to Intelligent Design to Theistic Evolution. Each of these requires completely different approach.

Eg no point arguing evolution with a Theistic evolutionist, they will agree with most of what science has to say on the topic. You can still add some spice to the debate about "when exactly does the soul or Divine image occur" ? Did Neolithic people have souls ? What about Palaeolithic or Cro-Magnon ? Neanderthals burying their dead ? Abstract cave paintings from Neolithic and pretty much identical DNA to modern man ?

Intelligent design is a whole unique area - can focus on the supremely botched up, cruelly barbaric designs of God.

So I think your focus is Young Earth creationism which MUST include the biblical Noach flood.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Baruch's post
26-01-2014, 08:25 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
(26-01-2014 08:18 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said please tell me. Thanks for readingThumbsup
You can find plenty of that below. Drinking Beverage

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Its not a good idea to debate these people in the first place, but when it comes up in a conversation or because someone wants to butt into the conversation your having, then you're going to have to be prepared.
*It's
*you're

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The first type is rare, but they are the ones that really want to understand what evolution is and want to know what people actually says about it.
*say

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  All you can do with these creationist is show them evidence objectively.
*creationists
*showing

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The other type are the conspiracy-believing, gay-hating, science-hating, and lying creationist.
*is

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  These will be most likely to butt into your conversation when they here about evolution.
*hear

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Instead, I'm going to get into these guys into more detail because they're many things that you must do to at least get these guys off your back and very rarely make them realize the folly of creationist.
*there are
*creationism

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The first step is not to debate Evolution with these people.
*evolution

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  They don't want to learn about it evolution at all.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Also, when they talk about the big bang, tell them that has nothing to do with evolution either and that too is not the topic.
*Big Bang
*that that (x2)

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  What is the more important topic?
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The second step is to go for the flood and other bible scientific inaccuracies.
*biblical

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  A creationist true foundation isn't the fall, it's the flood.
*creationist's

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The flood is the only way that creationist can come up with excuses to ignore scientific evidence.
*a

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Without it, there little myth gets curbed stomped by the foot of reality.
*their
*and

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Sorry for the violent expression, but reality is that brutal to myths like the bible anyway.
*Bible

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  They might yell "conspiracy", but then you must show them the next step.
*"conspiracy"

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  This step you must show them the flaw in there logic.
*At this
*their

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  For example, when they talk about the Smithsonian hiding giant fossils, replace "giant" with "transitional fossil" and "Smithsonian" with "Answers in Genesis".
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The last step is to show them that they aren't like you when if comes to evidence.
*it

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  For example, when the say "same evidence, different conclusions", tell them the folly of said thinking.
*they

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If they knew about the traits that a transitional fossil shows, then they would (hopefully) realize that they don't look at the same evidence, the ignore evidence so they can live in their delusion.
*they

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  When creationist like this appear and force you into this, I hope my steps can help.
*creationists

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Again, it's better to not debate them at all.
When you do debate them, pressure what they believe instead of showing them science they'll never except.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Use the science they do except(population bottlenecks for one) and show that the science they do excepts contradict a literal bible.
*accept (x2)
*contradicts
*Bible

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said please tell me. Thanks for reading. Thumbsup
Fixed.

Just another morning in Germany. [Image: vG3fPew.gif]

[Image: Y5tGBer.jpg]

This is the TTA not Grammar school & oh boy you have so much time on your hands. Its also not morning in Germany.

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-01-2014, 08:26 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
(26-01-2014 08:25 PM)Baruch Wrote:  This is the TTA not Grammar school & oh boy you have so much time on your hands. Its also not morning in Germany.
*It's

You must be new here. Laughat

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Vosur's post
26-01-2014, 08:27 PM
RE: How I Suggest You Debate Creationist
(26-01-2014 08:18 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said please tell me. Thanks for readingThumbsup
You can find plenty of that below. Drinking Beverage

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Its not a good idea to debate these people in the first place, but when it comes up in a conversation or because someone wants to butt into the conversation your having, then you're going to have to be prepared.
*It's
*you're

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The first type is rare, but they are the ones that really want to understand what evolution is and want to know what people actually says about it.
*say

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  All you can do with these creationist is show them evidence objectively.
*creationists
*showing

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The other type are the conspiracy-believing, gay-hating, science-hating, and lying creationist.
*is

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  These will be most likely to butt into your conversation when they here about evolution.
*hear

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Instead, I'm going to get into these guys into more detail because they're many things that you must do to at least get these guys off your back and very rarely make them realize the folly of creationist.
*there are
*creationism

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The first step is not to debate Evolution with these people.
*evolution

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  They don't want to learn about it evolution at all.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Also, when they talk about the big bang, tell them that has nothing to do with evolution either and that too is not the topic.
*Big Bang
*that that (x2)

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  What is the more important topic?
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The second step is to go for the flood and other bible scientific inaccuracies.
*biblical

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  A creationist true foundation isn't the fall, it's the flood.
*creationist's

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The flood is the only way that creationist can come up with excuses to ignore scientific evidence.
*a

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Without it, there little myth gets curbed stomped by the foot of reality.
*their
*and

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Sorry for the violent expression, but reality is that brutal to myths like the bible anyway.
*Bible

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  They might yell "conspiracy", but then you must show them the next step.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  This step you must show them the flaw in there logic.
*At this
*their

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  For example, when they talk about the Smithsonian hiding giant fossils, replace "giant" with "transitional fossil" and "Smithsonian" with "Answers in Genesis".
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  The last step is to show them that they aren't like you when if comes to evidence.
*it

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  For example, when the say "same evidence, different conclusions", tell them the folly of said thinking.
*they

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If they knew about the traits that a transitional fossil shows, then they would (hopefully) realize that they don't look at the same evidence, the ignore evidence so they can live in their delusion.
*they

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  When creationist like this appear and force you into this, I hope my steps can help.
*creationists

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Again, it's better to not debate them at all.
When you do debate them, pressure what they believe instead of showing them science they'll never except.
Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Use the science they do except (population bottlenecks for one) and show that the science they do excepts contradict a literal bible.
*accept (x2)
*contradicts
*Bible

Fixed.

(26-01-2014 07:16 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  If you have better ideas or scrutiny against what I said, please tell me. Thanks for reading. Thumbsup
Fixed.

Just another morning in Germany. [Image: vG3fPew.gif]

[Image: Y5tGBer.jpg]

Its not morning in Germany - Sun has not risen yet.
You have so much time on your hands - this is the TTA not grammar school.
Maybe grammar blog appropriate is it not ?

A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence -
David Hume


[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhOs7rUrS5bRKvWS7clR7...gNs5ZwpVef]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: