OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

A Common Theme

Entry 760, on 2008-05-01 at 21:33:45 (Rating 4, Comments)

Recently I have been debating with a young Earth creationist. The idea that the Earth is just 6000 years old is so insane that it must be easy to destroy this guy, right? Well in some ways it is, but in others it isn't. Anyone who really believes this sort of ridiculous theory is so out of touch with reality that they are less susceptible to reasoned argument than someone who believes a slightly more credible theory like intelligent design (note that in no way do I condone ID, but at least it isn't as silly as young Earth creationism).

I have had a similar experience with global warming deniers. Of course global warming is far more contentious than scientific alternatives to creationism (evolution, Big Bang, etc) but the effect is the same.

The common theme I have found is that the people I'm debating have an information source which consistently tells them what they want to hear and disguises the truth, or at least ignores the alternative view. Until these people look at the alternative views they will never really understand the truth. Even if they don't want to know the truth its still a good idea to read the opposition's material because it makes it easier to debate them.

For example, I found a Christian web site which rejected a creationist theory. That was stronger evidence than exactly the same thing from a pro-evolution site like Talk Origins or a theoretically neutral site like Wikipedia.

I have never really resolved the big question about the creationism sites. Do the people who create them, who seem fairly intelligent and knowledgeable, really believe their own material or do they put it there knowing its not true. In other words: are they deluded or liars? If they did any research at all they would find that their theories have been disproved already so why present them as if they are true unless you are deluded or dishonest?

Well I suppose I should be thankful for all of the interesting "alternative beliefs" because without them the world would be a more boring place and there would be less people for me to debate!

There are no comments for this entry.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.