Typical theistic argument?

Question

Yesterday I posted a question about human and chimp relatedness. I got a response from a certain someone (names withheld to protect the ignorant) in which if my claim was true a human female should give birth to a chimp. I sent a polite email explaining his misunderstanding of the evolutionary process. He sent one back in which he told me to read scientific journals and then presented some interpretations of the findings he no doubt got from the discovery institute and then said scientist say evlution takes millions of years because they have nothing better to explain it. I politely responded again and told him that I was in fact a biologist and had read many jouasked for a source. This is what I got instead:
Subject: Re: evolution...
Message: You're a really bad biologist (or you're just pretending to be one).
"My last answer came from a professional journal.
Next time speak to the facts I gave you rather than acting like a typical no-brain bigot with false assumptions."

I responded, ignoring the ad hominem attack and again asked for a source so I could weigh his claims against the material. This is what I got:
"Subject: Re: evolution...

Message: As a biologist, you should be aware of your own industries primary sources.

(I don't really believe that you're a biologist, though. You don't converse with others as if you have the requisite threshold of expertise, and you set a very low standard for information.)"

No source provided so I thought I'd give it another shot. Again with a polite email simply requesting a citation that I could check out. The response?:
"Subject: Re: evolution...

Message: I don't talk to idiots and liars.

Raise your moral standard to something resembling humanity."

I tried once more but have heard nothing more. I just wanted to debate and I got what you just read. What do you think?

Answer 1

I don't doubt that you're an intelligent person but...

God is the Creator of everything....and nothing could ever survive the test of millions of years.

The earth is no older than 6-10,000 years....

Answer 2

I would not say "Typical". Unfortunately, there are obnoxious and ignorant theists out there, just as there are obnoxious and ignorant atheists. All you have to do is read these boards and you will find plenty of examples of both. (In my experience the latter are more numerous, at least here on Y!A. The number of people who watch "The God Who Wasn't There" and read a couple of self-styled "skeptical" websites and then declare that God has been done for once and for all is staggering. I call these "neo-atheist trolls.")

There are certainly good arguments to be made on both sides, but insulting the opponent is not one of them.

Edit for icarus: "Education is the death knell of religious belief." That's a canard often repeated but so seldom thought about. I'd like to see any evidence of that. It's probably true that the best-educated people, when you're talking percentages, are the least Christian, but it does not follow that the former causes the latter. It may well be the other way around. Besides, there are two problems with the idea that education eradicates belief. First, you need to explain the many thousands of highly educated people who ARE Christians - somehow this eradication did not work for them. Second, you need to factor in the real religious beliefs of other highly educated people. Many are pantheists, most are materialists - which is just as "religious" a belief as Christianity.

Sorry, but your smug insults don't stand up to scrutiny.

Answer 3

Why are chimps and humans have some of the same characteristics i don't know, but i do know that the chimp is so much different from us in many ways. Just because something is similar doesn't make it related to you. I am a creationist, but i am always looking for facts. I believe that the Bible is all true because for me i have not found anything that is proven fact to contradicts it in anyway. As for you being verbally attacked I'm sorry someone decided to take it out on you and not the issue.

Answer 4

i do no longer understand approximately "maximum" theistic arguments, Neil. If the motive is to coach God exists, all such arguments fail in my opinion. If one takes the fewer ambitious tack of arguing that theism is clever, even the arguments you pillory may be useful. that is not lack of understanding, yet commentary that stands in the back of each and each of those. Irreducible complexity suffers from that is misapplication to specific structures while that is particularly on the subject of the courting between education and morphology (back in my opinion). The wonderful tuning argument is very just about actual valid so a great way because it is going. The narrow selection of cosmological constants consistent with existence as all of us understand that is not even arguable. this is in basic terms actuality. the debate is over whether or no longer those values are possibly absent an intelligence in the back of the universe. of direction there is no longer possibly any thank you to return to a selection this scientifically. the difficulty is, the two one among those incorporate consistent with theism. They extra wholesome what a theist expects to locate in nature. Does that coach God might desire to exist? Nah. whether it actual enables a theist justify the theory they already carry. For me, this is physically powerful adequate.

Answer 5

Clearly, the opinion of someone like this means little. I had a similar situation where I attempted to explain how an atheist could believe that Jesus existed, but wasn't quasi-divine, and still be an atheist. I got a haughty response back saying something like "Thanks for trying to convert me, but I'm happy with my religion." My message in no way attempted to convert anyone. I think avoiding the actual question or topic is a common tactic of the ignorant, religious or not.

Answer 6

No this isn't a typical theistic argument. This is YOUR way of getting back at the person you describe as (name withheld to protect the ignorant).

I'm not defending either one of you. You shouldnt have posted this at all here to attack him back. That makes you no better then him in his (ignorant) argument as you say. He got you to stoop to his level. His objective achieved.

Think about it.... then be careful about who you label as ignorant because you could just be speaking into your own life :)

Have a good day

Answer 7

Unfortunately there are all kinds of people, that's what biodiversity is all about! (Sorry a bad biology joke, or an attempt).

Electronic communication is a notoriously bad form of communication, as it is very easy to have what you said misinterpreted. It's obvious that this individual formed a preconceived notion about who you were and used that to color what you were saying.

Of course given the several "pseudo-science" web sites we've seen posted as proof against evolution, it's clear that many people have a limited understanding of science, research, or proof.

Answer 8

Debating logic and study versus blind faith is the equivalent of arguing with a woman, somethings just ARE because they SAY SO, and its better to just accept them and move on than have them stab you while you're sleeping.

Answer 9

typical, so typical. It amazes me that some peopel (kids) don't see that Genetics is delicate. It also amazes me that- writings from a journal are ALWAYS true and factual. Those of you out there that read this: Be careful of what you read and what you know/learn to be true. :-)

Answer 10

I agree with you.

Did you hear about the philosopher who, when kicked by the mule ignored the insult on considering its sourse. His reasoning was, No sain man will confront me, no other can.

Answer 11

Don't argue against faith. It is the same as peeing against the wind. It starts off fine, but you end up just getting plssed on when you make a good point.