Attn: Atheists?

Question

Why do we gratify creationists with an answer to their silly uninformed questions about what they think evolution is?

The other day, someone answered a big bang theory question with "this is established science- next question please"...

This answer places NO importance upon the originial question- it simply tells the questioner that their question is not worth our time-

What do you think?

star if you agree?

Answer 1

As it happens, I am the person who posted the answer you cite. And indeed, the question, as phrased, was not worth anyone's time.

Answer 2

It's a dilemma. Some of these absurdly dumb questions are so pathetic that it's tempting to throw in a fact or two, in the - probably vain - hope that it will make the person think.

Probably it won't, though. And even if it did they'd just hare off to answersingenesis and dig up some lie that'll solve the matter - for them, because these things are aimed at the ignorant.

But then again NOT answering in disgust allows such pillocks to think they've come up with a real cracker: Aha! So nobody can tell me where morals come from! etc. etc. ad nauseam.

CD

Answer 3

I don't understand why everyone seems to think that Darwin's theory of evolution and Intelligent Design are mutually exclusive. I believed we evolved – I also believe God planted the seed for our evolution.
The Garden of Eden is a nice story. At the time it may have been the simplest explanation to give humans.

It just requires a slight adjustment in your thinking. Not having been raised in church I have had to come up with my own conclusions – a mixture of the two makes the most sense to me.

Answer 4

I try to give thorough answers to show their scientific errors and prove that their accusations are unfounded. I think that other people might read the answers and be educated on it, too. If we put flippant statements as answers, it could make it look like we don't know or can't answer their criticisms. There are a lot of urban legends and rumors going around regarding these issues, so we should be refuting them.

Answer 5

Ignorance should always be challenged by facts, evidence and information.

Creationists say their view of the world is true "just because they and their Holy Book of the Talking Donkey say so". By simply saying "no, you're wrong" we invite the sort of school-yard argument that brings everyone down to their childish and simplistic level. Even though some of their statements may be laughably, ludicrously, obviously wrong I believe that any statement that they are wrong should always be backed by reasoned argument so that we don't fall into the same trap that they're already in of just parroting that they're right and everyone else isn't.

Answer 6

I think that it should be a mixed bag. A FEW people are honestly looking for answers and they might deserve an answer. But you are right in that most of the time those questions just deserve to be mocked.

Answer 7

I think if you are going to say that, you might as well just ignore it completely.

Why wouldn't their answers to our questions about Noah's Ark by saying, "This is established in the Bible" be just as valid by placing no importance on the question?

Answer 8

No, don't agree. I'm not a creationist, but stupid non-answers like that don't help convince *anybody* of the validity of their arguement. It's like saying "It just is". That's not an intelligent answer, it's something you'd say when you were in primary school.

Answer 9

I will continue to answer the questions on the slight chance that a neutral third party who is not completely brainwashed will be reading, and finds the info useful.

Answer 10

Some of them are looking for true answers to true questions - I think its worth giving them something to chew on.

I think a lot of them however already have their spoon-fed answers in the back of their heads, so much of our effort goes to waste