I'm really quite disappointed at the moment.

A co-worker, who I admire and have looked up to in the short time I've been here just told me he is convinced by the creationism argument. He believes that the earth is only 6000 years old, and that there's no scientific evidence to support evolution. He's heavily involved in his church, and recently they have been attending some meetings through the church in which they push the creationism meme. I really like this guy! He's a cool, older man who is like a mentor in many ways. He wasn't pushing the argument on me, (I believe in evolution and scientific facts), but I'm still a little disappointed none-the-less. The sad thing is, I didn't even try to debate it with him. I just nodded and smiled in my own stunned silence.

Amazing what organized religion can do to wipe out peoples ability to think for themselves.

the single exception? :eyes:

And brainwashing is a staple of cult membership.

Using religion as a brainwashing tool. I am very worried.

hardly behave and act in a manner like a cheesy Amazing Kreskin and that since when it comes to God there is no beginning and there is no end so why does he think he waited until 6000 years ago to create the flawed creature referred to homo sapien? Don't bother with the evolutionary thing with those guys, it's just waaaaaaaaaaay to difficult a concept for them to grasp. They prefer the cheesey magical act theory.

religion think for him.

That's the biggest criticism I have of religion and I am accused of being a snob or something but just think of it.

The guy did not come up with creationism. If he were to blank out his mind and then rebuild his thinking on the subject he might reject evolution and accept creationism but that would also mean he rejects all the scientific and technological findings on the subject. That is not the sign of intelligence if you ask me.

As Kant said in his definition of enlightenment, that is self imposed immaturity.

is still here? i understand the creationist museum shows dinosaurs being used like oxen but really.

is not someone who has come to terms with death, but one who has refused to die on any terms whatsoever.

This is an older man, and someone is offering him immortality.

Sounds like he needs to get to a museum of natural history forthwith.

I just saw the Charles Darwin exhibit currently at the Field Museum in Chicago. Quite simply amazing.

Or the permanent exhibit there "Evolving Planet" http://www.fieldmuseum.org/exhibits/ep_permexhib.htm

If he goes and takes anything like that in (decides to educate himself), the science cannot be denied.

if there is "not enough evidence" in support of evolution, then how in the world can they possibly state that there is enough evidence in support of creationism?

Oh yeah, God said so...

Like their creationism viewpoint is backed by ANY scientific evidence.

Sheesh.

He was telling me that because there was an average depth of only six inches of surface dust on the moon, that they were able to determine the age of the earth based on the rate of cosmic dust collection over a given period of time. Also, they have been able to somehow "debunk" the myth that is carbon dating? Now here's the scary part. The creationism nut-jobs are starting to invent arguments that on the surface seem "scientific", almost as if they are trying to reel-in the members of the parish with a little more upstairs than the average mouth-breather faithfully filling the collection plate every Sunday. I just bury my face in my hands and shake my head.

they have been doing this for at least 20 years

The pseudo science gives them some ahem "respectablity" and some of the folks doing this have actual, bona fide PhDs

Sufis say, "Do not try to wake the man who is asleep." You are wise in not trying to dissuade him. Other than his beliefs on creationism, he sounds like a nice fellow. Appreciate that--and the fact he's not trying to foist his beliefs on this matter on you.

It wasn't a confrontational thing at all. It was however a little disheartening to learn that even those we admire won't always share in our beliefs. I guess this was a "growing moment" for me.

right here on DU in R/T. It is a little disheartening to find how difficult it is to find common values there.

There is a web site called talkorigins.org that has a gret archive of articles that lay waste to creationist claims. Most of it is pretty accessible to us lay people, though some of it is pretty deep. I've found it to be a fantastic resource.

you just want him to think the way you do - about everything. To have supreme faith in 'scientific facts' which they cannot prove for themselves.

Real quick now, without using google or any reference books, name three or four scientific facts which prove evolution - macro evolution that is, jumps between species.

Did God "create" the polydactyl cat? Are the extra toes on the cats front paw a evolutionary trait, or did they just get put there? Would there be an evolutionary advantage for a feral cat to have some extra claws for hunting? Is this a genetic mutation that has become more prevalent over just the last decade? The answer by the way is yes, but I'll play by your rules and not cite any hard facts or evidence from, God forbid, Goggle. How about the half-life of the carbon14 atom? Hows come we can dig up dinosaur bones, but can find no human skeletal remains from the same era when creationists so conveniently try to depict man walking alongside them?

Evolution is a fact, only the mechanism of evolution is a theory.

Sounds like it's YOU who would rather foister your beliefs on everyone, about everything.
Personally, I don't want him to think the way I do, but I want him to think for himself. Rather than march lock-step with the religious right, and confuse propaganda for fact.

For me, the whole argument is about as worrisome as a cloudy day.

Making it merely micro-evolution. Very few people deny environmentally caused changes within a species. But does that prove it will become two different species?

Maybe the google restriction isn't fair, but my point is whether you can prove it yourself without linking to something by Darryl Dawkins or some such. Make your own argument, like this:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/53

If it is, indeed a fact, then show me the evidence. Otherwise your argument boils down to "Darryl said it, I believe it" or "I read it in a textbook, so it must be true".

One other thing I am saying is that most people in this country who accept evolution do so on faith - faith in their textbooks, faith in their teachers, faith in scientists and the scientific process. Others are taught to question your sources and put their faith in other things - their own books, their own teachers, and faith in received wisdom.

Evolution is not a fact, it is a theory like the Laffer curve or like Newton's laws of motion. It is either confirmed by the facts, or questioned, or, like the Laffer curve, debunked.

It's not an important argument to me either, but I question people on either side when they seem a little too cocksure of the certainty of their side, without, apparently knowing all that much about the subject. The earth may be 6 years old it may be 6 billion years old. I am not sure how belief in any number on that spectrum necessarily makes somebody a bad person. Now belief in the Laffer curve, or Oparin. That's another story.