Why Are So Many Creationists Conspiracy Theorists? (scrutiny, tradition, evolution)

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by Jay

That's fair, since I don't have a problem with a creator who designed a world such that it has all the characteristics of a world not so designed.

He sure made it look easier than it is! I have a hard time just remodeling my house!

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

Do we have figures on how many of these creationists ascribe to these views?

I've run across creationists who hold the view scientists are in some kind of conspiracy to hide the weaknesses of evolution.

Or is this merely a red herring designed to impugn all creationists with a broad brush?

Re-read the OP and see if I say "all creationists".

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

He sure made it look easier than it is! I have a hard time just remodeling my house!

shalom, my friend

[Scuba Pete]

"So many" is the term I used, and usually it makes one think of "most". Some is a far better descriptor unless you are trying to be contentious.

I could start a thread with "Why do so many atheists beat their wives?" or "Why are so many atheists rude?", but knowing that this would add unneeded baggage to the discussion I would refrain from doing so.

However, how many is "Many" for you? 10? 100? 1000? or more? Possibly you could express this in terms of percentages for us? Maybe it's %5 or possibly %95? But, if your assertion is "many", please allow us to try and determine not only your criteria for this denominator but your motivation as well. This clarification will make a difference in how "many" of us will respond to the OP.

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by Scuba Pete

"So many" is the term I used, and usually it makes one think of "most". Some is a far better descriptor unless you are trying to be contentious.

I could start a thread with "Why do so many atheists beat their wives?" or "Why are so many atheists rude?", but knowing that this would add unneeded baggage to the discussion I would refrain from doing so.

However, how many is "Many" for you? 10? 100? 1000? or more? Possibly you could express this in terms of percentages for us? Maybe it's %5 or possibly %95? But, if your assertion is "many", please allow us to try and determine not only your criteria for this denominator but your motivation as well. This clarification will make a difference in how "many" of us will respond to the OP.

Pete, this is a side issue. But if you want to know, my impression is most creationists would need to concede that their notion of how "evidence is swept under the rug", "ignored by scientists", or "dismissed" implies that scientists must be in some kind of conspiracy to hide weaknesses in evolutionary theory -- they would need to concede that if they ever thought through what they are saying. However, I don't think most creationists think through what they're saying well enough to realize they are implying scientists are in a conspiracy to deny the weaknesses in evolutionary theory.

[Scuba Pete]

Thanks for your candor.

I would suggest that "most" creationists could care less about creationism or are so confused as to WHO to believe that they keep to what is simple. It would be my unsupported belief that you have arrived at your conclusion from hearing the VOCAL minority of creationists who are worried about losing some of their faithful.

If they were asked directly if they believed in such a conspiracy, I am confident that most of them would wonder what you were actually talking about. Unless of course, if you used a very narrow view of "creationist"

[rocketman]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

But if you want to know, my impression is most creationists would need to concede that their notion of how "evidence is swept under the rug", "ignored by scientists", or "dismissed" implies that scientists must be in some kind of conspiracy to hide weaknesses in evolutionary theory -- they would need to concede that if they ever thought through what they are saying.

Ok, "most": Now we know how many you meant. My 'impression' is that most creationists do not see evidence being swept under the rug but rather being interpreted differently, as per the quote I gave from their leading website. My 'impression' is that one or two who have a radical view give the rest a bad name. My 'experience' tells me that you are very wrong. My 'instincts' tell me you are wrong but you mean well.

Originally Posted by Sunstone

However, I don't think most creationists think through what they're saying well enough to realize they are implying scientists are in a conspiracy to deny the weaknesses in evolutionary theory.

I don't think you have thought through well enough what you are saying. Many creationists think that mainstream science is less than energetic in confronting some of the less well understood aspects of TOE. I quoted one scientist who is energetic about it and he thinks others should be too. So obviously scientists vary in their willingness to admit the levels of weakness with the theory. Now where in all of that do creationists point to a deliberate conspiracy?

There is a big difference between noting that scientists hold dogmatically to their lens of interpretaion vs declaring that there is a full-scale fully-planned organised sinister conspiracy going on behind the scenes.