Clearly with the "descriptions" people are giving of the Creationist's view of events (such as man living with dionsaurs) people are unaware of what is actually written.

A few small corrections...Creationists aren't trying to have it taught in schools in lieu of evolution, but along with it. I'm not sure of my feelings on the matter.

The real problem is that evolution and creation are not actually opposites.

I do understand the criticism of the government that requires evolution to be taught but bans creationism.

As I said, I don't believe evolution has much evidence going for it

BS.

If a God exists, then why on earth would his role be to "eliminate" rational, logical, systematic thought? He might as well have just created a rock. (if he did create anything at all)

"This story takes place a half a billion years ago-an inconceivably long time ago, when this planet, would be all but recognizeable to you. Nothing at all stirred on the land, except the wind and the dust. Not a single blade of grass waved in the wind not a single cricket chirped, not a single bird soared in the sky. All these things were tens of millions of years away in the future.

But of course there was an anthropologist on hand. What sort of world would it be without an anthropologist? He was, however a very depressed and disillusioned anthropologist, for he'd been everywhere on the planet looking for someone to interview, and every tape in his knapsack was as blank as the sky. But one day as he was moping alongside the ocean he saw what seemed to be a living creature in the shallows off shore. It was nothing to brag about, just sort of a squishy blob, but it was the only prospect he'd seen in all his journeys, so he waded out to where it was bobbing in the waves.

He greeted the creature politely and was greeted in kind, and soon the two of them were good friends. The anthropologist explained as well as he could that he was a student of life-styles and customs, and begged his new friend for information of this sort, which was readily forthcoming. ""And now"", he said at last, ""I'd like to get on tape in your own words some of the stories you tell among yourselves.""

""Stories?"" the other asked.

""You know, like your creation myth, if you have one."

""What is a creation myth?" the creature asked.

""Oh, you know,"" the anthropologist replied, "the fanciful tale you tell your children about the origins of the world.""


Well, at this, the creature drew itself up indignantly- at least as well as a squishy blob can do- and replied that his people had no such fanciful tale.

""You have no account of creation then?""

""Certainly we have an account of creation,"" the other snapped. ""But its definately not a myth".

""Oh certainly not,"" the anthropologist said, remembering his training at last. ""Ill be terribly grateful if you share it with me.""

""Very well,"" the creature said. ""But I want you to understand that, like you, we are a strictly rational people, who accept nothing that is not based on observation, logic, and scientific method.""

""Of course, of course,"" the anthropologist agreed.

So at last the creature began its story. "The universe," it said," was born a long, long time ago, perhaps ten or fifteen billion years ago. Our own solar system-this star, this planet, and all the others- seem to have come into being some two or three billion years ago. For a long time, nothing whatever lived here. But then, after a billion years or so, life appeared."

""Excuse me,"" the anthropologist said. ""You say that life appeared. Where did that happen, according to your myth- I mean, according to your scientific account.""

The creature seemed baffled by the question and turned a pale lavender. ""Do you mean in what precise spot?""

""No. I mean, did this happen on land or in the sea?""

""Land?"" the other asked. ""What is land?""

""Oh, you know,"" he said, waving toward the shore, ""the expanse of dirt and rocks that begins over there."

The creature turned a deeper shade of lavender and said, ""I cant imagaine what you're gibbering about. The dirt and rocks over there are simply the lip of the vast bowl that holds the sea.""

""Oh yes,"" the anthropologist said,"" I see what you mean. Quite. Go on.""

"" Very well,"" the other said. ""For many millions of centuries the life of the world was merely microorganinisms floating helplessly in a chemical broth. But little by little, more complex forms appeared: single-celled creatures, slimes, algae, polyps, and so on.""

""But finally,"" the creature said, turning quite pink with pride as he came to the climax of his story, "" but finally jellyfish appeared!"

I'm sorry to inform you that some people actually do believe this crap

And I think this quote sums up my view of Religion's view on creationism/evolution/self-importance (from my favorite book). It's a bit long, but I think it's worth reading:

A man comes to his Rav asking, "I'm a very busy man and have lots of important things to do, I want you to teach me what I need to know very quickly so I may be on my way."

The rabbi responds, "Take these pieces of paper, and read the first one when you are feeling proud and succesfull, read the second one when things are not going so well.."

The first piece of paper reads, "I come from a putrid drop, and the gnat's creation proceeded my own."

The second piece of paper read, "I am placed above the angels, and the entire world was created for my benefit."

Not BS, if you think god is a creation of the human mind.

...
This leads to people who distrust religion as propaganda, it leads to distrusting science as leftist, and it leads to conspiracy theories, that allow people to believe that there were no moon landings, the earth is flat, or in 9/11 being a plot by the US government. People put their own bias when arguing these issues. ...

In otherwords, if you act like an Arrogant prick, it's not going to work to convert or make your point understood, it will only make you feel morally superior. I think if this subject should be debated, you want to convince others of your viewpoint.

I read the Norris thread which is why I mentioned "Flat Earth", but this thread was more appropriate to talk about those views.

Here's the problem:

People build their entire lives around religion. Religion is the reason to condemn homosexuality, fight the system, be good to other people, sometimes the only reason to wake up in the morning. There is no rationally talking someone out of that. At some point you stop trying to convince the evangelicals and start trying to turn them into a maligned minority. It's better for all involved parties.

Because it totally isn't proven that the Earth is older.

Is mitbulls wanting to prove that not all publicity is good publicity, or that creationism isn't warped logic?

I'm interested if he can prove creationism is true, and I would like to hear it. If he wants to prove the other thing, that's just boring.

proving that creationism is true, is very different than proving that creationism is not warped logic.

Not really, no.

You have to have warped logic to believe it is true. Unless I'm mistaken, "God made the earth" is not the only aspect of creationism. If it was, I'd be fine with it. Creationism also argues against evolution. Evolution is not something that "might" happen, it does happen. It's always amusing when people try to argue that it doesn't.

whatever, you are speaking emotionally, not logically, and pretending that "Intelegent Design" (which is the REAL argument) doesn't recognize evolution. It does recognize evolution, it just doesn't believe in the word "random."

cre·a·tion·ism /kriˈeɪʃəˌnɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the doctrine that matter and all things were created, substantially as they now exist, by an omnipotent Creator, and not gradually evolved or developed.

The real debate about YEC, is not what the bible says, but the debate of if what a non-scientific book says is more important than what Scientific research says. And that debate is long over.