Is anyone else bothered by creationist sites like www.answersingenesis.org?

Question

Is anyone bothered by sites like this? They do a real good job of spoofing science. I have checked up numerous "facts" and presumptions used by creationists all over the internet, libraries, and science teachers; these clearly hold no water. Isn't anyone worried that cleverly disguised "Scientific" creationist sites could brainwash our youth? I mean, they seem to have tons of "facts" disproving the scientific age of the earth and etc, but when you research them they are pseudo nonsense. They not only don't understand the scientific majority side, they don't even understand what they are saying. I am worried that these people and sites our doing harm to our society. Do we want to live in the dark ages?

The problem is that many people read these malicious sites and use their "facts" in debate without any other GOOD sources!

*Sigh* That faked drawing is old news. The ones in books today are new proved drawings... Once again...creationists using century old evidence. WHAT ABOUT GALILEO?

If someone wants to make a serious argument against me, at least list your source from something unbiased. For example sites that have words in the title including genesis, good, spirituality, etc... I don't think i have ever heard one "fact" from a creationist that hasn't spawned out of a creationist site. Almost all of these "facts" are what can be considered PSEUDOSCIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 1

Absolutely I'm bothered by them. But they also do a service ... showing how utterly intellectually bankrupt and devoid of integrity creationism is.

The problem with web sites is that the very people who avoid learning in school, who avoid science books, or science magazines, are now able to find *tons* of misinformation online to feed the conclusions they developed with almost no thought or science education whatsoever.

You see the results here ... people marching in proudly to state that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics ... when it is clear they have no friggin *clue* what thermodynamics means! Or people without so much as a basic college course in Genetics OR Information Theory declaring that "mutations cannot produce new information" ... again completely unable to articulate what that even means. They declare without hesitation that "did you know Darwin recanted on his deathbed?" or "51% of chemists believe that the cell could not have evolved." or "we now know the speed of light is not constant" ... and there is no effort, *NONE*, to verify that these absurd factoids are even remotely true. They read it on some web site somewhere, so that's enough for them.

Tia here provides another great example of a creationist declaring "facts" without checking, or even *caring*, whether they are true.
"have you looked at the evidence lately? In 1900s there was a famous scientist [that Tia can't remember] who faked drawings that pretended to make evolution true, but those drawings were proven that they were faked. Yet, they are still in science textbooks everywhere to support evolution"
The drawings Tia is referring to are Ernst Haeckel's embryo drawings ... and these were not in the 1900's but in 1874 ... and they were not purporting to support evolution but to establish a theory about embryology ... and they haven't appeared in a science text book in support of evolution for over 100 years! But that doesn't stop Tia believing, and repeating on a web site like this, that textbooks still use those 130-year-old drawings! And then other gullible creationists will pick up this "factoid" and repeat it like "fact" elsewhere in the Internet. And this is how lies and misinformation spreads like a virus.

But the bigger picture is how creationism is hurting our country. This isn't some quaint little debate about human origins. This is a Holy War against science itself.

I'll give a small example. Recently a textbook in Texas on Environmental Science (not Biology) was re-edited to get approval for use in Texas schools. One of the things the editors changed in order to satisfy some objections raised by fundamentalist groups: ... a reference to how glaciers formed the Great Lakes "millions of years ago" was changed to "in the distant past." How on earth can we have an honest discussion of climate change, global warming, etc. if any science evidence presented must be consistent with a 6,000-year old earth?!

In summary, creationism *by necessity* teaches that the scientific community can be so utterly wrong *ON MATTERS OF SCIENCE* that they are not to be trusted ... that scientists are universally either idiots or liars.

So when it comes to evaluating claims about global warming, about whether smoking is bad for you, about whether there are WMDs in Iraq, etc. etc. ... ... voters have no ability to weight the sources of *evidence* ... they are vulnerable to the argument by politicians, religious leaders, corporate representatives that they know better than the scientists *ON MATTERS OF SCIENCE AND EVIDENCE* ... they are vulnerable to the argument, "don't trust those 'experts', those 'scientists' ... what do they know?"

And in a democracy in the 21st century, this is death.

Answer 2

I definitely see your point. Of course, we don't want to start censoring the internet. So that's why sites like TalkOrigins got started - to counter these arguments, show the basic flaws, and provide the real evidence for evolution. http://www.talkorigns.org

Obviously, it's working on some people - like the first few who answered this question. I think the biggest problem is that so many people just don't get science. Sure, they memorized a lot of facts in high school, but they never actually learned what science IS - a process by which we can learn about the natural world. They didn't get it. They don't understand how much they use it and think they can just toss it aside when they don't like what it's saying. And that's just sad. And very detrimental to a country like the US which has science and technology among it's major exports.

Answer 3

I'm afraid there's lots of misinformation on all sides. I am bothered by pseudoscientific arguments, especially on creationist views which aren't even required by, or well supported by, the Bible. It doesn't bother me when they study evidence and reach a different conclusion. It does bother me when they don't study the evidence or don't understand science. I think some macroevolutionary theories go beyond what the evidence supports. But in fairness, I how have Richard Dawkins' book, The Ancestor's Tale (recommended by secretsauce), so I can see exactly what evidence is being used to support the claims.

Answer 4

Www.answersingenesis.org

Answer 5

I can't say I agree. Creationist sites like the site mentioned offer good evidence. You complain about the creationist evidence, but have you looked at the evidence lately? In 1900s there was a famous scientist who faked drawings that pretended to make evolution true, but those drawings were proven that they were faked. Yet, they are still in science textbooks everywhere to support evolution. Why? They have no real evidence.


If you can show me one Bible contradiction or something that has been proven wrong, I may believe you.

Answer 6

i became into questioning of desirous to have my movements be accomplished with much less understanding, even doing some that i'm attentive to, as subconscious. In questioning alongside this line, i found out that my sensory organs could make such desire for subconscious events, almost impossible. one way of doing this, is letting myself watch television. often times as I do, I regularly think of, as i assume many do, "do i truly opt for to be ingesting Cheetos and watching this comedy coach, or doing something else?" i assume yet another attention could be, "how torpid do i opt for to be?" at circumstances, whilst there are issues to captivate concept, its not why worry questioning, however the point, do not worry questioning plenty in any respect. it rather is to have get entry to to calming events and concept frightening (or effective) events. because of the fact the King pronounced, there could be no king with out its pawns. attempt googling that. xP

Answer 7

I am bothered by this... But if we get rid of them there will be no more people to prove wrong, and i like proving people wrong... The look of self-realization and stupidity when they crash scientifically, ahhhh, Bliss!

Answer 8

God did create the whole world. And people belieiving that is definately not harming the society.