by cathy » Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:58 am
The only one I attended where free Q and A was allowed, the man was torn to shreds (not literally). The ones in churches don't allow questions lest they lose their target market, Behe allowed questions but they were carefully managed so when he didnt' answer them properly (and he didn't) no opportunity was allowed to point that out.
When you come across them on forums its not only that they don't answer questions and ignore questions and refuse to acknowledge points, but that they raise unrelated and ridiculous issues. Ask Garner for evidence that the Earth is 6000 years old and he'll say thats not the question (yes it is) the question is something to do with footprints in deserts that could possibly have been underwater instead and therefore could possibly be a tiny record of Noahs flood that escaped being washed away when said flood was carving out the Grand Canyon in its lunch hour. You just know that there is no way he'd have mentioned they're evidence for Noahs flood to other geologists cos they'd have pointed out that even if he was right about said footprints, it would NOT be compelling evidence for a global flood 4000 years ago. Sadly you also know he will then have implied to his creationist groupies that it has huge significance and is a huge piece of creationist evidence. Or something equally inane and duplicitious.
Ask them why creationism should be taught as science when it hasn't been validated by any scientists and they resort to getting annoyed about removing God from the curriculum. Which seems to blatently gnore RE, which is pretty God and Gods centred as a subject, and the fact God isn't mentioned in other subjects like history or dt either because it doesn't crop up.
Or they will start pointing out that Newton was a Christian-which is an interesting fact but irrelevant to gravity or light which are just the same to atheists, Muslims, Hindus, agnostics etc. And to be honest Newton popping to church on Sundays isn't really proof that the Earth is 6000 years old and everything appeared in a week either! And it doesn't really explain the fossil record or whatever other question you've asked, as in:
Q "explain why dating methods don't give ages anywhere near 6000 years?"
A "You seem to be ignoring the fact that Newton was a Christian, and therefore by definition a creationist!"
Aaaaarrrggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In terms of logic, it is easier to converse with 120 two year olds who've been fed blue smarties with added e number dips than to try to deal with one creationist.
(Where I'll be if the fish don't bite).