What is your take on creationism/creationists?

[Reasonable]

kowenicki said:

Reasonable said:

kowenicki said:

Reasonable said:

Jordahn said:

The bottom line here is that everyone is religious whether they admit it or not.  Having a religion simply means believing in something that gives some kind of meaning/motivation in our lives.  That applies to ALL of us.  But in regards to creationism, there are facts that have given validation to a relatively young earth as opposed to the conventional billion of years of evolution.  There is no fact or science that has proven that evolution is true.  Believing in an unproven theory is just as religious as believing that creationism is fact.

Wrong.  You're making the mistake of the layman assumption all scientific theories are just theories.

Theory as a word has multiple meanings and sadly, with literacy being what it is, most people assume one meaning - particularly creationists who persist in chosing the meaning where theory is simply a theory vs the correct meaning in this context which is a proven theory through observation and test.

Accepted scientific theories are essentially viewed as facts based on tested observations vs a theory that hasn't yet attained this status.

Also, not believing in supernatural deities isn't just a variation of faith or a religion in and of itself - it's a different proposition based on known facts only not faith without evidence nor necessarily the belief in some supernatural state, aferlife or deity.

Arghh!  I'm posting in here again!  I must stay out of this thread it's just too annoying.

just tell every one to read "the greatest show on earth" - richard dawkins

explains it all very well....

 

I know.   I've got it on my bookshelf!  I'm trying to avoid getting sucked in to this, though.

But now you've mentioned it...

Everyone interested in this should read this book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Greatest-Show-Earth-Evidence-Evolution/dp/055277524X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276607070&sr=8-1

I finished it quite recently....

I figured it would be a good read after reaidng "The God Delusion" last year.

I like his style.

Agreed.  I believe he just takes a methodical approach that really builds the evidence very nicely until it really strikes you how extensive and persuasive it is.