Stanford Staab has a blog and a post that became a newspaper editorial.
It is stupid from start to finish but I restrained myself and looked at one specific claim he made:
But when you get down to it, the evolutionists have to admit that the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable.
Why is this unacceptable? I would have to say it is due to the fear of guilt one would face if one were to admit to a creator and a moral authority.
I comment on his blog post, noting that more than 15,000 American Christian clergy disagree with him. If nothing else, for them "the thought of an intelligent creator is simply" not "unacceptable".
The comment thread:
" But when you get down to it, the evolutionists have to admit that the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable.
Why is this unacceptable? "
Your lie here is quite unacceptable. Turns out that more theists than atheists in the US are evolution proponents. That's right; although virtually all atheists are evolution proponents, there are so many Christians that the evolution-accepting percentage is greater than the number of atheists.
So now it is clear that "the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable." is a lie. It is a shame that you hate evolution so much without knowing much about it. I pity you for your poor education.
There are many textbooks on evolution that open admit this clear fear. I have heard of museaums that have been challenged with showing exhibits of long-ago proven false hypothesis only to come and say "if we removed that we wouldn't have anything to show to support evolution". If you contest this assertion see Kent Hovind's free creation/evolution seminar tapes available at drdino.com.
I can see that this post may rapidly turn into an athiest v creationist bashing contest. If that happens I will simply not accept comments as this was not my purpose. Athiests don't believe in God - so why should they fight those that do? They have no basis for moral authority so how can they impose one on others?
BTW - the number of people that believe something doesn't make it true. I know this goes both ways but I am not arguing on the basis of popularity, I am arguing on the basis of logic as I see it.
"There are many textbooks on evolution that open admit this clear fear"
I didn't mention any fear. So there is no clear fear here.
I did mention that the following is wrong:
<i>"the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable."</i>
And that is not true. It is a lie. It is a dishonest thing to say.
You wrote
" the number of people that believe something doesn't make it true. "
And that is true and fair but irrelevant. The fact that more theists than atheists accept evolution means your claim that "thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable." is a lie. Here is a group of American Christian clergy who are fine with evolution. There are a lot of them but that doesn't make their claim true. It does mean that your claim - that " the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable." is false
https://www.theclergyletterproject.org/
You wrote:
"athiest v creationist bashing contest."
No, this is an evolution proponent calling you on your lie. Again, many theists are fine with evolution. So many theists are fine with evolution that claiming "the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable" is wrong.
If you care about honesty, you will admit your error.
You are calling me a liar - that is bashing.
Of course I am calling you in-sane because so far I have seen no logical or empirical arguments to support your position.
To atheists, all my comments are irellevent - why does this bother you?
As to FEAR I don't mean spooky creepy scared, I mean ashamed to be shown to have no real evidence to suport evolution.
As I said, see the Hovind Creation/Evolution video or this really good one I watched last night for details. (https://youtu.be/CFYswvGoaPU?t=724) Even Richard Dawkins can't come up with a decent and logical explination for evolution. You guys are bankrupt in your delusion of accidental creation. And THAT is my opinion which cannot be a lie.
"Of course I am calling you in-sane because so far I have seen no logical or empirical arguments to support your position."
Then that reflects on you. My position is that many theists are fine with and to claim
""the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable."
, is to lie.
Why is it a lie? Pay attention because this is the part where I (again) support my position:
https://www.theclergyletterproject.org/
More than 15,000 American Christian Clergy who are Christians and accept evolution. They are Christian so to say "the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable." is to lie.
You see how I did that? I noted a claim you made that was not true.
I explained why it was not true.
I gave actual evidence that it was not true.
You lied and you refuse to admit it or change your statement. Previously you had been a person who lied once. But in not admitting it you are becoming a person best described as a liar. Not bashing but stating a fact.
why you claim "thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable."" you are lying. It is that simple. And it colours everything else you write. I see that you make a false claim and immediately feel that nothing else you write can be trusted either. The way you run from this topic and try to change the topic strengthens my poor opinion of you. But it is the kind of thing that Hovind would do so you are indeed like your mentor.
So I get your arguement. There is this group that call themselves "Christian" that happen to also believe in "evolutionary theory". Never mind that a mirage of crap has been shoved down all our throats since we were 5 years old in public school. Never mind that they have probably never taken a second thought that all that repetition of unverified or lying crap might not be true. So now we have this "opinion" that somehow becomes legitimate ammo and gets labeled as "evidence for evolution". As I have said and you have agreed, "opinion" is not "scientific evidence" no matter how many or what groups have that opinion.
Scientific / Emperical evidence means repeatable/testable/demonstratable kinds of evidence.
If you can show me one legit example of say:
* Non-life turning into a self repairing, self replicating life form
* The progression of one kind of life into another or even a clearly intermediate form between two types
* Show how a star or solar system is actually born with observable evidence.
* Demonstrate any chemical process that would create DNA and new information to create a life-form.
* Prove the age of fossils or rocks using techniques that don't require massive assumptions.
* Show how a river anywhere cuts deep canions over time and how this can happen on groud that is rising. (Grand Canyon)
How many of whoever has an opinion is not evidence.
My stating that the only reason evolutionists believe in the theory is because they are afraid to even think of a creator with true moral authority is simply stating what has been admitted publically many times. I should give you a precise example but I know there is a good one or two in Kent Hovind's creation/evolution seminar tapes.
You are saying that this claim is false but if you listened to the material I mentioned you would see the specific examples that show this is not a lie.
It might seem to you to be an unreasonable assumption but to me it is very reasonable because there simply is no evidence or logical story that can back up any part of evolutionary theory and this then requires blind faith by any follower of evolution that we spontaneously came into all our glory by accident.
I have used the analogy of a ball-point pen stood up on its nose with the ball retracted. Most pens can be made to stand this way on a still level table. Now explain how that got that way without purposeful intelligent intervention. There is no other explanation that holds water. If that pen falls it will NEVER get back up to its original position with out intelligent help either directly by a human or indirectly via some device invented by a human.
Write your own blog and sell your own ideas and stop bashing mine. (Unless you can actually come of with acceptable scientific, repeatable, observable evidence to prove me wrong.)
." There is this group that call themselves "Christian" that happen to also believe in "evolutionary theory"."
Keep in mind 'this group' is the majority. That does not make it right, but it does make it more than 'this group'. Young Earth Creationists are a minority. That doesn't make them wrong but it means they should know about their own religion.
"Never mind that a mirage of crap has been shoved down all our throats since we were 5 years old in public school. Never mind that they have probably never taken a second thought that all that repetition of unverified or lying crap might not be true."
You are describing religion here, not science. Yes, this is a problem for you creationists.
". So now we have this "opinion" that somehow becomes legitimate ammo and gets labeled as "evidence for evolution"."
No, it is however evidence that this claim of yours is wrong. Not my opinion but you are factually wrong when you say:
"the evolutionists have to admit that the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable."
When you say that. you are lying.
And I feel strongly that lies are bad. You appear not to mind so much.
"My stating that the only reason evolutionists believe in the theory is because they are afraid to even think of a creator with true moral authority is simply stating what has been admitted publically many times."
Some people may say that. But here are 15,000 American Christian Clergy who say otherwise: https://www.theclergyletterproject.org/
Still, humour me. Quote three such claims. They need to say they are afraid of there being a creator. They need to say this is why they are evolution proponents.
Just three. Or, you are lying again.
"You are saying that this claim is false but if you listened to the material I mentioned you would see the specific examples that show this is not a lie"
You claim that
" the evolutionists have to admit that the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable."
remains a lie. I have read your post and I find all of it foolish but this seemed an easy point to argue. I mean, there are more theists than atheists in the US that accept evolution so what you claimed was not true. This is easy, this is verifiable and it is true. You made a statement that was not true.
Being honest seems to concern me more than it does you. Your dishonesty is not atypical in creationists and is a reason I find all theists suspect. I need greater honesty than you display.
"(Unless you can actually come of with acceptable scientific, repeatable, observable evidence to prove me wrong.)"
Let's do this:
I say this claim is wrong:
"the evolutionists have to admit that the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable."
My evidence?
15,000+ American Clergy who clearly accept God and also accept evolution. https://www.theclergyletterproject.org/
Done. I await your apology. An honest person would have admitted their error long ago. I still hold hope that you have some vestige of integrity in you.
" they are afraid to even think of a creator with true moral authority is simply stating what has been admitted publically many times. I should give you a precise example..."
Yes, you should but you cannot. Go ahead; name three: They need to say they are afraid of there being a creator. They need to say this is why they are evolution proponents.
First give me an example of REAL scientific (repeatable, observable, testable) evidence to support the theory.
I will admit that I don't know that ALL atheists are afraid of the idea of a God might be true. Evolutionists generally discount the idea of creation a-priori because it is against their "religion".
I am saying that the only logical reason for this kind of blind anti-faith is a deep down fear of guilt and accountability because blind anti-faith is not rational or scientific – which is what atheists generally claim to be.
This is an opinion, and not a statement of fact. It cannot be a lie because of that.
As for the majority of ‘Christians’ believing in evolution, I still can’t see how that (granted for arguments sake) “fact” changes my assertion about atheists. It is an obtuse point that does not address the original assertion.
Let me state my original point here at the beginning: The majority of evolution proponents in the USA are Christian. This means your claim that " the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable." is wrong. It is a lie.
Here is another point. Not really a new one:
Evolution proponent does not mean atheist. Again, more Christians than atheists in the US are evolution proponents. Any time you claim that "the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable" is simply not true.
"First give me an example of REAL scientific (repeatable, observable, testable) evidence to support the theory."
You would not listen or read it if I did. And besides, I have brought up only one concern here. One you seem terrified to admit and accept.
"I will admit that I don't know that ALL atheists are afraid of the idea of a God might be true""
Who cares? I haven't ever been talking about atheists. I have only been talking about this lie you stated:
"the evolutionists have to admit that the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable."
You wrote "evolutionist" which is a silly word but again, it is not the same as 'atheist'. In mentioning 'atheists' at all is to deceive here.
And again this lie:
" they are afraid to even think of a creator with true moral authority is simply stating what has been admitted publically many times. I should give you a precise example..."
Evolutionists generally discount the idea of creation a-priori because it is against their "religion".
No. Once again, the religion of the majority of evolution proponents in the USA is Christianity. Is it so hard for you to speak the truth? Are you so afraid of the truth? Evolutionist could mean many things but it does not mean atheist. To claim it does is to lie.
"which is what atheists generally claim to be."
We are talking about evolution not atheism. The two are not the same as I have stated and actually, given evidence.
You did notice that I did give evidence that many Christians are fine with evolution, correct? You saw that? So the clear problem is, you asked me for "(Unless you can actually come of with acceptable scientific, repeatable, observable evidence to prove me wrong" and I gave it. And you still cannot accept it or admit it. If I were to show actual evidence for evolution, it would not matter. I gave actual evidence for my simpler, more obvious claim and you still cannot bring yourself to face it.
"As for the majority of ‘Christians’ believing in evolution, I still can’t see how that (granted for arguments sake) “fact” changes my assertion about atheists. It is an obtuse point that does not address the original assertion."
Your assertion about atheists is irrelevant. We are talking about evolution proponents and that is not the same as atheists.
I guess it is because you are lying to yourself. Let's go back to my original assertion. Here is what the first thing I wrote:
"" But when you get down to it, the evolutionists have to admit that the only real reason why they must support the idea is because the thought of an intelligent creator is simply unacceptable.
Why is this unacceptable? "
Your lie here is quite unacceptable. Turns out that more theists than atheists in the US are evolution proponents. That's right; although virtually all atheists are evolution proponents, there are so many Christians that the evolution-accepting percentage is greater than the number of atheists."
I am far to honest to be a creationist like you. Note that this says nothing about my religious beliefs; I can say that and be Christian, Jewish, atheist, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or other. If ever you wonder why non-creationists do not take you seriously and don't believe your claims, note how you have lied and lied again in this post and comment thread. You do your own personal credibility no favours here.