Why do creationists largely use only straw-man arguments?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

That makes up at least 80% of their arguments from what I've noticed. Find me a single scientists who claims that you can get a dog by somehow combining a starfish and a grain of wheat.

[Devilman88]

That makes up at least 80% of their arguments from what I've noticed. Find me a single scientists who claims that you can get a dog by somehow combining a starfish and a grain of wheat.

What are you talking about?

[Franzl]

He's talking about creationists misrepresenting the opinion of people that believe in evolution.

For example, I hear "I can't believe that humans evolved from apes" all the time from creationists, despite the fact that that claim isn't made by evolutionists.

[Devilman88]

He's talking about creationists misrepresenting the opinion of people that believe in evolution.

For example, I hear "I can't believe that humans evolved from apes" all the time from creationists, despite the fact that that claim isn't made by evolutionists.

Ah, the getting a dog out of a starfish and gain thing triped me up.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Generally because Creationists do not grasp Evolution. If they did they would become Evolutionists.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

     Generally because Creationists do not grasp Evolution. If they did they would become Evolutionists.

Exactly. They refuse to even consider the concept of evolution because of their never ending fear of death, but accept even the most ridiculous aspects of their religion as absolute truth, with no evidence. I have had to hear that 'I don't believe we evolved from monkeys' crap constantly, which the churchs feed them to make sure they stay dumbed down.

The thing that infuriates me the most if when they say, 'No one has ever observed evolution happening, so it can't be proven'. Beyond the fact that that statement is inaccurate, what do you accept Noah's Ark or the Tower of Babel? Did you observe those events? One again: A fear of hell and a longing for heaven.

[JSojourner]

     Generally because Creationists do not grasp Evolution. If they did they would become Evolutionists.

Exactly. They refuse to even consider the concept of evolution because of their never ending fear of death, but accept even the most ridiculous aspects of their religion as absolute truth, with no evidence. I have had to hear that 'I don't believe we evolved from monkeys' crap constantly, which the churchs feed them to make sure they stay dumbed down.

The thing that infuriates me the most if when they say, 'No one has ever observed evolution happening, so it can't be proven'. Beyond the fact that that statement is inaccurate, what do you accept Noah's Ark or the Tower of Babel? Did you observe those events? One again: A fear of hell and a longing for heaven.

That's a start, but it goes deeper.  It's true of a lot of irrational fundamentalists.  They have been told that A is true.  (Because the Bible says so, Pastor says so, the Pope says so, or whatever.) Therefore, if A is proven untrue...or is even thought to be understood differently than in the past...it must mean that B (something else I believe and cherish) must also be suspect. 

The hobgoblins of small, fearful minds.

I strongly suspect evolution is reality.  History.  I also believed God created the Heavens and the Earth.  And I see absolutely no conflict there.  I am not sure why so mnay of my fellow Christians feel threatened by the notion of evolution.  At least when William Jennings Bryan objected to it, he was largely concerned about the possibility that scientific Darwinism could lead us down the gilded age path to social Darwinism.  Oh, the irony.

Today, some of the most vociferous advocates of social Darwinism are those most outspoken opponents of scientific Darwinism. 

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I strongly suspect evolution is reality.  History.  I also believed God created the Heavens and the Earth.  And I see absolutely no conflict there.  I am not sure why so mnay of my fellow Christians feel threatened by the notion of evolution.

Exactly.  I don't see any sort of conflict; if God can create the world, why can't He set evolution as the way for it to happen?

[Earth]

It contradicts the literally taken creation story. There's an ideologically driven separation between man and animal, and that's the way creationists would like it to stay. There's a lot of deeper issues involved than simply creationists smirking at the erroneous thought that man was spawned from an ape.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

[Earth]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

That's an easily counterable argument, though, if you consider God/Creator to work methodically; essentially a scientific theological view.

[Devilman88]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but there is a Heaven and Hell.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but there is a Heaven and Hell.

     Do you have an eyewitness account to offer of either or both (preferably both) places?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

He's talking about creationists misrepresenting the opinion of people that believe in evolution.

For example, I hear "I can't believe that humans evolved from apes" all the time from creationists, despite the fact that that claim isn't made by evolutionists.

Ah, the getting a dog out of a starfish and gain thing triped me up.

It's from a quote from Michele Bachmann.

[Alcon]

Dare I point out how often you've poisoned the well? 

There are much more talented apologists for creationism than you've run into.

[Aizen]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but there is a Heaven and Hell.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but there is no heaven nor hell. (I can play this dumb game too!)

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but there is a Heaven and Hell.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but there is no heaven nor hell. (I can play this dumb game too!)

Personally, I like bursting bubbles.

[Devilman88]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but there is a Heaven and Hell.

     Do you have an eyewitness account to offer of either or both (preferably both) places?

No, but do you have proof that Heaven and Hell are not real?

[Sewer]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but there is a Heaven and Hell.

     Do you have an eyewitness account to offer of either or both (preferably both) places?

No, but do you have proof that Heaven and Hell are not real?

Do you have proof that Heaven and Hell are real?

[Devilman88]

Once again, this displays simply clinging to the idea of god and not be able to let go. Have you ever thought why would god use such a process when he could just poof it into existence? Accept your fate, there's no fairytale life for the goody goodies, and no endless torment for the baddies.

I'm sorry to bust your bubble, but there is a Heaven and Hell.

     Do you have an eyewitness account to offer of either or both (preferably both) places?

No, but do you have proof that Heaven and Hell are not real?

Do you have proof that Heaven and Hell are real?

No, I just said that. But both sides have faith that they are right. This is how I look at it, if I am right them I'm going to heaven. If I'm wrong will then it will not matter because I will be dead in the ground and not know any better.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

You cannot not say that because you can't prove the supernatural is isn't real, that it is equally valid to believing it is real. Because there is no evidence for it, rational thinkers will choose not to believe it.

[Franzl]

That's like arresting me now and accusing me of murdering somebody who I didn't even know, and have no way to prove didn't happen.

Does that make it just as likely that I'm guilty as innocent?

[RI]

Isn't the title of this thread a strawman itself?

[Devilman88]

You cannot not say that because you can't prove the supernatural is isn't real, that it is equally valid to believing it is real. Because there is no evidence for it, rational thinkers will choose not to believe it.

That's like arresting me now and accusing me of murdering somebody who I didn't even know, and have no way to prove didn't happen.

Does that make it just as likely that I'm guilty as innocent?

Both sides can't prove of disprove Heaven or Hell. So why are we even talking about it?

[Franzl]

You cannot not say that because you can't prove the supernatural is isn't real, that it is equally valid to believing it is real. Because there is no evidence for it, rational thinkers will choose not to believe it.

That's like arresting me now and accusing me of murdering somebody who I didn't even know, and have no way to prove didn't happen.

Does that make it just as likely that I'm guilty as innocent?

Both sides can't prove of disprove Heaven or Hell. So why are we even talking about it?

Just like I can't prove I didn't kill anybody yesterday

Does that mean the odds are 50-50 that I did?