Difference between revisions of "Creation vs. evolution debates"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎top: Spelling/Grammar Check, typos fixed: 1970's → 1970s)
m (Factual edits.)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
[[Creation science]] is [[science]] which sets out to show that [[supernatural]] [[creation]] of the material [[universe]] by [[God]] is consistent and compatible with the available scientific evidence.  
 
[[Creation science]] is [[science]] which sets out to show that [[supernatural]] [[creation]] of the material [[universe]] by [[God]] is consistent and compatible with the available scientific evidence.  
  
−
Creation scientists tend to win the [[creation]] vs. [[evolution]] debates and many have been held since the 1970s particularly in the [[United States]]. Given the [[evolution|lack of evidence for the evolutionary paradigm]] and the [[creation science|abundant evidence for biblical creation]], this is not surprising.  
+
No creationist, or someone who believes in the supernatural design of the universe, has ever won a debate against an intelligent evolutionist. Given the complete absence of evidence for the existence of a god, this is not surprising. Creationists base their arguments on faith, which is by definition the suspension of logic and reason to defend something that has no evidence.  
  
 
In August 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”<ref>[http://www.icr.org/article/811/ Reason or Rhetoric] by [[Henry Morris]], PhD</ref>
 
In August 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”<ref>[http://www.icr.org/article/811/ Reason or Rhetoric] by [[Henry Morris]], PhD</ref>
 
Morris also said regarding the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”<ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref>
 
Morris also said regarding the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”<ref>[http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website]</ref>
  
−
Generally speaking, [[Atheism and Debate|leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists]] because creation scientists tend to win the debates.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/811/</ref> In addition, the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|concerning his refusal creation scientists]].   
+
Generally speaking, [[Atheism and Debate|leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists]] because creation scientists tend to never win the debates.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/811/</ref> In addition, the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] has shown no inconsistent and deceptive behavior [[Richard Dawkins' public enthusiasm to debate creationists|concerning his refusal creation scientists]].   
  
−
Evolutionists and atheists inconsistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetic]] website [[True Free Thinker]] which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/speaking-assiduous-absconders%E2%80%A6yet-again-vox-day-challenges-pz-myers-debate</ref>  In an article entitled ''Are Kansas Evolutionists Afraid of a Fair Debate?'' the [[Discovery Institute]] states the following:
+
Evolutionists and atheists consistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetic]] website [[True Free Thinker]] which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."<ref>http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/speaking-assiduous-absconders%E2%80%A6yet-again-vox-day-challenges-pz-myers-debate</ref>  In an article entitled ''Are Kansas Evolutionists Afraid of a Fair Debate?'' the [[Discovery Institute]] states the following:
 
{{cquote|Defenders of Darwin's theory of evolution typically proclaim that evidence for their theory is simply overwhelming. If they really believe that, you would think they would jump at a chance to publicly explain some of that overwhelming evidence to the public. Apparently not.<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/02/are_kansas_evolutionists_afraid_of_a_fai.html</ref>
 
{{cquote|Defenders of Darwin's theory of evolution typically proclaim that evidence for their theory is simply overwhelming. If they really believe that, you would think they would jump at a chance to publicly explain some of that overwhelming evidence to the public. Apparently not.<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/02/are_kansas_evolutionists_afraid_of_a_fai.html</ref>
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 16:48, July 26, 2016

Dr. Duane Gish

Creation science is science which sets out to show that supernatural creation of the material universe by God is consistent and compatible with the available scientific evidence.

No creationist, or someone who believes in the supernatural design of the universe, has ever won a debate against an intelligent evolutionist. Given the complete absence of evidence for the existence of a god, this is not surprising. Creationists base their arguments on faith, which is by definition the suspension of logic and reason to defend something that has no evidence.

In August 1979, Dr. Henry Morris reported in an Institute for Creation Research letter: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”[1] Morris also said regarding the creation scientist Duane Gish (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”[2]

Generally speaking, leading evolutionists no longer debate creation scientists because creation scientists tend to never win the debates.[3] In addition, the atheist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins has shown no inconsistent and deceptive behavior concerning his refusal creation scientists.

Evolutionists and atheists consistency concerning debating creationists was commented on by the Christian apologetic website True Free Thinker which declared: "Interestingly enough, having noted that since some atheists refuse to debate “creationists” but then go on to debate some of those people but not others, it is clear that they are, in reality, being selective and making excuses for absconding from difficulties..."[4] In an article entitled Are Kansas Evolutionists Afraid of a Fair Debate? the Discovery Institute states the following:

“ Defenders of Darwin's theory of evolution typically proclaim that evidence for their theory is simply overwhelming. If they really believe that, you would think they would jump at a chance to publicly explain some of that overwhelming evidence to the public. Apparently not.[5] ”
Richard Dawkins
The atheist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior concerning his refusal creation scientists.

In 1994, the arch-evolutionist Dr. Eugenie Scott made this confession concerning creation vs. evolution debates:

“ During the last six or eight months, I have received more calls about debates between creationists and evolutionists than I have encountered for a couple of years, it seems. I do not know what has inspired this latest outbreak, but I am not sure it is doing much to improve science education.

Why do I say this? Sure, there are examples of "good" debates where a well-prepared evolution supporter got the best of a creationist, but I can tell you after many years in this business that they are few and far between. Most of the time a well-meaning evolutionist accepts a debate challenge (usually "to defend good science" or for some other worthy goal), reads a bunch of creationist literature, makes up a lecture explaining Darwinian gradualism, and can't figure out why at the end of the debate so many individuals are clustered around his opponent, congratulating him on having done such a good job of routing evolution -- and why his friends are too busy to go out for a beer after the debate.[6]

”

In 2010, the worldwide atheist community was challenged to a debate by Creation Ministries International as prominent atheists were speaking at a 2010 global atheist convention in Australia.[7] Richard Dawkins, PZ Myers and other prominent atheists refused to debate Creation Ministries International.[8]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Reason or Rhetoric by Henry Morris, PhD
  2. ↑ Voices for evolution - John Ankerberg website
  3. ↑ http://www.icr.org/article/811/
  4. ↑ http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/speaking-assiduous-absconders%E2%80%A6yet-again-vox-day-challenges-pz-myers-debate
  5. ↑ http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/02/are_kansas_evolutionists_afraid_of_a_fai.html
  6. ↑ http://www.skepticfiles.org/evo2/credebec.htm
  7. ↑ http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown
  8. ↑ http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Creation_vs._evolution_debates&oldid=1265581"