Opinion of Young Earth Creationism

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

The world was created the day I was born. Everything was created on that day, aged and with planted memories. Even the star light was placed at the right point to make everything seem eons old. I demand that schools teach the truth because I am really important.

Afleitch is correct. Actually, the world was created 20 minutes ago. Everything that seemed to happen before that was a collective implanted memory.

(Ridiculous, but no more so than the 6-10 ky timeline of YACs)

YACS is an organized crime designation referring to criminal groups from the former Yugoslvaia and Albania.

[RFayette]

My main issue with Young Earth Creationism is this: (1) people who believe in it (without a single exception I know of) are fundamentalist or evangelical Christians who believe you must accept Jesus as your personal savior (and by implication, the Bible as the Word of G-d) or else go to Hell, and who (2) believe G-d is omnipotent, omniscient, and all-loving.

So, this G-d deliberately deceived his created beings by creating fossils, etc. in the earth to give it the appearance of being ancient.

If I may.... what a monster.

I chose option 3.

That's an unusual take. All the YECers I know say they're a result of Noah's flood and what not.

True, but the interpretations that requires (such as the Cretacious and Triassic fossils being buried in a difference of a matter of months, as the premier creationist organization Answers in Genesis argues) would require rates of radioisotope decay to change so quickly during the Flood Period that were it not for supernatural intervention, the Earth would explode as a result of the extreme level of radiation. released over such a quick period of time.  

That's all correct, but I'm not discussing it with them in depth. All I was commenting on is that I've never heard the "God set this up to be a test of faith argument" among the actual creationists I know.

I think mathstatman's point was that the logical implications of a young Earth would effectively make it a test of faith, not that proponents of YEC would put it that way....of course, how we define deception and how it could (if at all) apply to God is a thorny issue.

[Enduro]

As a young earth creationist, freedom philosophy (or ideology, i don't know for sure what it is)

[The_Doctor]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such. 

[Mopsus]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such. 

"Anyone... working with less brainpower than the average... deserves to be brutally mocked"?

[RFayette]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such.  

I know people with phD's in biology and materials engineering who hold to that position.  They are wrong, of course, but to say they all have less brainpower than average is ridiculous

[The_Doctor]

Young Earth creationists believe we were created 6,000 years ago and God just made Adam and Eve -- and they weren't being metaphorical. To be kind, how does anyone hold evolution as some sort of “fraud” as a reasonable inrellectual position? Why don't we debate what color the sky is now since maybe it's actually a lovely color of maroon?

To be fair if you want to hold it as a tenet of faith but acknowledge it to be unrealistic or unsupported in the scientific world sure, that's a semi reasonable position that won't have me denying your brainpower.

[The_Doctor]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such.  

"Anyone... working with less brainpower than the average... deserves to be brutally mocked"?

Yes of course that's what I said. Don't be silly. I specifically identified people with a specific opposition to evolution as fraudulent to be working with less brainpower. I didn't call the mentally challenged retards. Big difference.

[Mopsus]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such.  

"Anyone... working with less brainpower than the average... deserves to be brutally mocked"?

Yes of course that's what I said. Don't be silly. I specifically identified people with a specific opposition to evolution as fraudulent to be working with less brainpower. I didn't call the mentally challenged retards. Big difference.

So now that we've established that unintelligent people hold problematic opinions, how do we keep them from affecting politics? Do we administer IQ tests to people applying to vote? Or do we make them take the Political Matrix quiz, deciding that those who answer a certain way are, ipso facto, not intelligent enough to deserve our respect?

[The_Doctor]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such.  

"Anyone... working with less brainpower than the average... deserves to be brutally mocked"?

Yes of course that's what I said. Don't be silly. I specifically identified people with a specific opposition to evolution as fraudulent to be working with less brainpower. I didn't call the mentally challenged retards. Big difference.

So now that we've established that unintelligent people hold problematic opinions, how do we keep them from affecting politics? Do we administer IQ tests to people applying to vote? Or do we make them take the Political Matrix quiz, deciding that those who answer a certain way are, ipso facto, not intelligent enough to deserve our respect?

As the saying goes the average voter puts democracy in question. Winston Churchill. But what can you do? Nothing unfortunately. They get an equal stake. Creationists have a right to vote. I do have a right to mock them and their mental faculties if they decide that their creationist views should be in politics specifically in the education curriculum.

The anti science electorate is significant.

[The_Doctor]

To be fair if you want to hold it as a tenet of faith but acknowledge it to be unrealistic or unsupported in the scientific world sure, that's a semi reasonable position that won't have me denying your brainpower.

No offense, but I doubt these people care much about what a Democrat from New Hampshire has to say about their brainpower.

Aren't you, again no offense, a Trump voter who ended up concluding Trump was a con artist despite plenty of evidence during the election?

EDIT: Very relevant to my point about this topic when you think about it. A lot of creationists are that way because someone told them it was true and they never investigated it further, actually.

[RFayette]

Aren't you, again no offense, a Trump voter who ended up concluding Trump was a con artist despite plenty of evidence during the election?

Given the fact that the alternative was Hillary Clinton, I'm hardly disappointed that he won the election. I never had high expectations for his presidency, and while things could be worse, he's certainly turned out to be a con artist. But I doubt many other Republicans would have been any better than Trump in this regard. The problem is the party itself, not Trump.

And no, no one told me that you are a Democrat, but the insane hatred you have for the Republican party is really unhealthy and makes me believe you will soon be a loyal Democrat. Not that you aren't wrong when it comes to issues like abortion, but like I said, the party is the problem here, not Trump. Also, I'm not a Young Earth Creationist, but I hope you won't be too upset if one wins a Congressional race in 24 days.

Yeah, I am no YEC by any stretch (and have discussed this at length in the past), but the demonization/overgeneralizing of the people who hold such positions is really beyond the pale.  An whatever his opinion is on that topic, Gianforte is awesome and will make a great congressman.

[Green Line]

It is a healthy alternative viewpoint to Darwinian evolution.

This. It should be taught just like any other theory.

[Mopsus]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such.  

"Anyone... working with less brainpower than the average... deserves to be brutally mocked"?

Yes of course that's what I said. Don't be silly. I specifically identified people with a specific opposition to evolution as fraudulent to be working with less brainpower. I didn't call the mentally challenged retards. Big difference.

So now that we've established that unintelligent people hold problematic opinions, how do we keep them from affecting politics? Do we administer IQ tests to people applying to vote? Or do we make them take the Political Matrix quiz, deciding that those who answer a certain way are, ipso facto, not intelligent enough to deserve our respect?

As the saying goes the average voter puts democracy in question. Winston Churchill. But what can you do? Nothing unfortunately. They get an equal stake. Creationists have a right to vote. I do have a right to mock them and their mental faculties if they decide that their creationist views should be in politics specifically in the education curriculum. 

I thank you for your honesty.

[The_Doctor]

Anyone who believes that evolution is fraudulent is clearly working with less brainpower than the average homo sapiens and should be brutally mocked as such.  

"Anyone... working with less brainpower than the average... deserves to be brutally mocked"?

Yes of course that's what I said. Don't be silly. I specifically identified people with a specific opposition to evolution as fraudulent to be working with less brainpower. I didn't call the mentally challenged retards. Big difference.

So now that we've established that unintelligent people hold problematic opinions, how do we keep them from affecting politics? Do we administer IQ tests to people applying to vote? Or do we make them take the Political Matrix quiz, deciding that those who answer a certain way are, ipso facto, not intelligent enough to deserve our respect?

As the saying goes the average voter puts democracy in question. Winston Churchill. But what can you do? Nothing unfortunately. They get an equal stake. Creationists have a right to vote. I do have a right to mock them and their mental faculties if they decide that their creationist views should be in politics specifically in the education curriculum.  

I thank you for your honesty.

This is not as radical or earth shattering as you think. Creationists surely have a right to mock me for thinking Jesus isn't coming back on a dinosaur but I think in the long run, my opinion is going to be considered more intellectually sound.

If you ask me, climate change deniers and creationists definitely lose plenty of respect. So do anti-vaxxers. I have equal dislike/contempt for all of these people.

Aren't you, again no offense, a Trump voter who ended up concluding Trump was a con artist despite plenty of evidence during the election?

Given the fact that the alternative was Hillary Clinton, I'm hardly disappointed that he won the election. I never had high expectations for his presidency, and while things could be worse, he's certainly turned out to be a con artist. But I doubt many other Republicans would have been any better than Trump in this regard. The problem is the party itself, not Trump.

And no, no one told me that you are a Democrat, but the insane hatred you have for the Republican party is really unhealthy and makes me believe you will soon be a loyal Democrat. Not that you aren't wrong when it comes to issues like abortion, but like I said, the party is the problem here, not Trump. Also, I'm not a Young Earth Creationist, but I hope you won't be too upset if one wins a Congressional race in 24 days.

You will recall I predicted his win and you changed your prediction to one that mirrored mine.

And no, I will not become a long term Democrat. For one, I hate Social Security and Medicare and I'm intensely pro-business. I dislike what my party has become in terms of turning itself over to the Bannon wing and allowing Russia to influence the election without much in the way of complaints, but beyond that (and beyond their climate change issues), I don't have a ton of issues with the GOP. I just hate what they did in 2016 so I'm cool with them suffering as a consequence.

I'm pretty sure I vote for the GOP after Trump if they wise up. (Which I think will happen).

[TJ in Oregon]

Cal, voicing categorical disdain toward people who hold views you think are wrong is just about the worst possible way to convince them. It does nothing practically, morally, or ontologically to further the causes you believe in. If you want to persuade a YEC perhaps the best way to proceed is to figure out why they hold that view and what assumptions they are making that leas to an erroneous conclusion. Simply sweeping in in the name of SCIENCE with an appeal to authority neither helps to persuade anyone, nor does it help to defend science. It actually undermines science because science is a method of thinking rather than a conclusion. It is harmful to treat it as the opposite, whereas if people become convinced that the scientific process reveals objective information about the universe, they will likely come to the same conclusions as you.

[TJ in Oregon]

Gee, that'll convince them of evolution!

Fortunately, most YECers are unaware they have rejected reason.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Why was my post deleted?  I tried removing a duplicate and now both are gone.

[RINO Tom]

I never responded to the OP, but I find them harmless but a tad frustrating, ONLY when they push the narrative that their belief in a young Earth makes their Christianity more legitimate than mine or something.  Evolution, which has a lot more evidence in its favor, is perfectly compatible with a Christian faith.

[The_Doctor]

Cal, voicing categorical disdain toward people who hold views you think are wrong is just about the worst possible way to convince them. It does nothing practically, morally, or ontologically to further the causes you believe in. If you want to persuade a YEC perhaps the best way to proceed is to figure out why they hold that view and what assumptions they are making that leas to an erroneous conclusion. Simply sweeping in in the name of SCIENCE with an appeal to authority neither helps to persuade anyone, nor does it help to defend science. It actually undermines science because science is a method of thinking rather than a conclusion. It is harmful to treat it as the opposite, whereas if people become convinced that the scientific process reveals objective information about the universe, they will likely come to the same conclusions as you.

This is reasonable; if I ever came into contact with a YEC outside a forum I would probably take your tactic.

And, sure, I agree but I was posed a question on my opinion. To me objective information indicates evolution created life as we know it. Certainly I'm no atheist; I strongly believe in a higher power. But I do have a hard time with people who believe in a literal view of Creation.

So put it this way -- evolution was and is one of God's greatest inventions for sentient organic life. By my lights each scientific discovery is further proof of a divine power who wove the entire universe together with intricate threading. It's just slightly disturbing to me that some assume God is no more intelligent than a five year old who merely plucked us out of thin air and set us down on Earth fully made. Evolution is a grander exposition of His imagination, wisdom, and inventiveness.

Suppose I put that way, I might have attracted less fire.

[Goldwater]

Somewhere between 3 and 4. People are free to believe whatever they want, but I would like to eradicate it in the education system and among people with any power.

[Gustaf]

Why was my post deleted?  I tried removing a duplicate and now both are gone.

For the record, both those duplicate posts were reported but had not been acted upon. I suspect you somehow managed to delete them yourself. I was going to edit out the bit about eradicating human beings though.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Matters of verifiable fact should not be settled by appeals to religious dogma, and this is a point that needs to be emphasized in the process of education.

[SingingAnalyst]

[jate88]

It is obviously false and children deserve an accurate scientific education.