The Top Three Mistakes Of Creationists?

[Sunstone]

Although I know there are some scientists who know a great deal outside their own specialty, I also know that it is somewhat disingenuous to quote the typical hydrologist on evolution and then pronounce that his (or hers) is a "scientific" opinion of evolution.

That's like quoting the typical gynecologist on heart surgery and then declaring that hers is a valid opinion of heart surgery because she's a doctor. Wonderful!

She might know enough to give a valid opinion on heart surgery -- after all, anything is possible -- but the odds are frankly against it. So too the odds that a hydrologist has kept up with the evolutionary sciences well enough to be called an expert in them.

Courts of law have standards of proof that are well below the standards of science, but not even a law court would allow a hydrologist to serve as an expert witness on evolution without convincing proof that s/he was competent in the evolutionary sciences. The tendency of Creationists to simply assume that all scientists know enough about evolution to be experts in it is merely thinking so sloppy that it could nourish hogs.

 

[Real Sorceror]

We've all seen creationists come onboard and repeat again and again the same mistakes. But if you had to rank the typical mistakes of creationists, which ones would you rank as the top three? Why those three?

Why do creationists make the same mistakes over and over again?

I love these three, they are so ignorant and so common. If creationists would take 3 seconds, they could understand the flaws in their logic:
1)"If man evoloved from monkeys, why are there still monkies?"
2)"The Flood explians why we find seashells on mountains"
3)"Nobody has ever seen an animal evolve"

I despise these:
1)"There is no fossil evidence for evolution" :areyoucra
2)"Scientific dating methods are all innacurate"
3)"The Bible says the Earth is only about 6,000 years old"
4)"Legends of dragons are actually dinosaurs"