A Muslim writes about Jesus - Is This The Most Embarrassing Interview Fox News Has Ever Done?

[Runa216]

happydolphin said:

Figgycal said:

As with many things; I think I'm gonna go ahead and agree with 99 percent of the world's scientist on this issue. And young earth creation scientists are not actual scientists : their works are not peer reviewed, they limit their thinking and conclusions to a religion - these "scientists" will never arrive to the conclusion that they might be wrong, because that's not an option for them. They start out with an answer from their religion and work their way down to find out how that answer might be possible, rather than the other way around. In many cases these scientists are also priests, or preachers, or evangelists, or plumbers, regular people, etc. Their ideas don't hold up to scrutiny from actual scientists. What they're doing isn't science; it's pseudoscience.

You wouldn't want someone who wrote an article that wasn't peer reviewed, and yet went against everything scientists know as fact, for example: "not exercising and eating excessively is good for your health" be your doctor would you? So why let a person like that be the one you trust for accurate information?

@bold. That's your choice, but if you're going to go with majority, just remember that majority was with the church in Galileo's day. Just sayin', majority was wrong.

@Peer review. That's simply untrue -> http://creation.com/creationism-science-and-peer-review

@Validation of theories. That's wrong, they posit theories to support the biblical claims, and often disagree with each other within the creationist community.

@Pseudoscience. What YOU'RE doing is pseudoscience, excuse me. You're just repeating words from the anti-creationist community and I hear the same words over and over again, they are just meaningless drivel (no joke). This is not to offend you, I just proved a few claims by you and MDMAlliance false already, there is likely much more.

So to answer your last paragraph, I trust them a lot because they actually do science rather than pretend to in order to fit with the concensus. There are good scientists on both sides, but imho the onus is on creationists to prove their worth and so I have seen what they do and trust it more as a true quest for scientific truth than the other way around (so far). It's my opinion. If I were to choose someone to tell me the truth, I'd choose the creationist.

You scare me.  The above response is 100% the kind of tricky, slippery, slimy, backwards, do-anything-to-contort-the-world-to-prove-a-point mentality is about 75% of the reason I'm so aggressively outspoken about religion being taught and perpetuated in modern civilization.  It's an affront to progress both intellectually and sociologically.  The other 25% goes out to the terrorists and extremists that perpetuate the "Science raises buildings, Religion brings them down" mentality that I've been harbouring for years.