Why do Evolutionists not like to actually debate Evolution and rely on personal attacks?

[Shermana]

It seems in Evolution debates, whenever the Creationist posts anything, rather than actually discussing the claims, those on the TOE side generally just make snide comments, attempt to insult the intelligence, ignore the actual counter-argument, double down on the same point the Creationist/IDer is arguing against without defending against the claims, dismisses them and handwaves them or ignore the rebuttal to their own counter-arguments, and then get silent when they agree to address creationist-science claims and it turns out the "Creationist science" actually is not as easy to debunk as they thought? Is there even any point in a Creationist stepping into the ring if there's not going to be any serious debate? What about this subject causes those on the Evolution side to more often than not act so immaturely?

It seems to be a general trend. Even in the professional world, attacks on Behe's works are basically all ad hominem and rarely if ever an attempt to debunk the claims of science involved. The argument that "There's no science to debunk" is in itself yet another smear that's ultimately proof that they're not even capable of addressing what they want to smear.

Are evolutionists not interested in actual debate on this subject?

Are evolutionists simply looking to have a good bashing time without any of that pesky debate involved?

Are evolutionists simply content to go by an appeal to authority of the provenly-overwhelmingly-atheist-majority as if that alone settles all evolution debates?

Why even have sections on debates between evolutionists and creationists if evolutionists aren't remotely interested in mature, solid discussions and simply want to make it attack fests?

Is the basis of the evolutionist point of view simply to try to ridicule the Creationist point in hopes of relieving themselves of the actual need to debaet their claims, as if they can just say "Oh Creation.com is all lies" and that's that?

Is this an honest method of debate? Or is this simply a tell-tale evidence of total intellectual dishonesty, vitriol-based tactics and laziness?

 

[LuisDantas]

We just keep seeing the same variations of misrepresentation, dishonesty and plain ignorance keep attempting to have the upper ground over fact and research.

It gets old fast, and takes a lot out of our patience.

In fact, this so-called controversy is far more interesting and substantial as a sociological phenomenom than as anything relating to cosmology, biology or even theology.

 

[Sunstone]

We just keep seeing the same variations of misrepresentation, dishonesty and plain ignorance keep attempting to have the upper ground over fact and research.

It gets old fast, and takes a lot out of our patience.

In fact, this so-called controversy is far more interesting and substantial as a sociological phenomenom than as anything relating to cosmology, biology or even theology.

I agree on all points with Luis here.

 

[Shermana]

We just keep seeing the same variations of misrepresentation, dishonesty and plain ignorance keep attempting to have the upper ground over fact and research.

It gets old fast, and takes a lot out of our patience.

In fact, this so-called controversy is far more interesting and substantial as a sociological phenomenom than as anything relating to cosmology, biology or even theology.

And that's further example of what I'm talking about.

All you want to do is write off their claims as such, as "Dishonesty" "Misrepresentation" and "Plain ignorance" Without actually addressing the claims. You see, those on the Creation side think that the Evolutionists are also "plainly ignorant" (Which is quite often the case, as many on that side have no better than a 6th grade level), and rely on total "Dishonesty" and "misrepresentation" of the facts. So what makes their claims less valid of the opposing side than yours?

So are you essentially justifying such behavior?

 

[Shermana]

I agree on all points with Luis here.

Okay, so you also are trying to justify the vitriol and attempt to dodge the actual debate?

Why not actually prove how the Creationists are "Dishonest" and "misrepresent" and are "plainly ignorant"? How do you know the Creationists aren't correct that it's the other side who is dishonest, plainly ignorant, and misrepresenting?

Seriously, no other subject sees as much vitriol and dodging actual points, why could that be?

Why even have a Creationist Vs. Evolutionist debate section if you think all there is to addressing Creationist arguments is to write them off as such?

 

[Sunstone]

And that's further example of what I'm talking about.

All you want to do is write off their claims as such, as "Dishonesty" "Misrepresentation" and "Plain ignorance" Without actually addressing the claims.

Their claims have been addressed time and time again. They simply ignore that fact. So what's left? As Nietzsche said in a somewhat different context, when someone doesn't listen to reason and evidence, one is permitted to inquire about their psychology.

 

[Poeticus]

Their claims have been addressed time and time again. They simply ignore that fact. So what's left? As Nietzsche said in a somewhat different context, when someone doesn't listen to reason and evidence, one is permitted to inquire about their psychology.

Namaste,

Yeah, what he said ^^...

M.V.

 

[Willamena]

It seems in Evolution debates, whenever the Creationist posts anything, rather than actually discussing the claims, those on the TOE side generally just make snide comments, attempt to insult the intelligence, ignore the actual counter-argument, double down on the same point the Creationist/IDer is arguing against without defending against the claims, dismisses them and handwaves them or ignore the rebuttal to their own counter-arguments, and then get silent when they agree to address creationist-science claims and it turns out the "Creationist science" actually is not as easy to debunk as they thought? Is there even any point in a Creationist stepping into the ring if there's not going to be any serious debate? What about this subject causes those on the Evolution side to more often than not act so immaturely?

Oh, it's not just the Evolution vs. Creationism arguments, trust me.

 

[tumbleweed41]

The problem is, there is no real debate.

And until the highly improbable time when Creationists can provide objective empirical scientific evidence FOR creationism, there will continue to be no real debate.

 

[Sunstone]

Okay, so you also are trying to justify the vitriol and attempt to dodge the actual debate?

Why not actually prove how the Creationists are "Dishonest" and "misrepresent" and are "plainly ignorant"? How do you know the Creationists aren't correct that it's the other side who is dishonest, plainly ignorant, and misrepresenting?

Seriously, no other subject sees as much vitriol and dodging actual points, why could that be?

Why even have a Creationist Vs. Evolutionist debate section if you think all there is to addressing Creationist arguments is to write them off as such?

How intellectually honest of you is it to pretend that Creationist claims have not been addressed on this forum? Have you ever read any of Painted Wolf's posts? Or any of the other members who have painstakingly addressed Creationist claims on this very forum? If not, why not? And, if so, why do you persist in saying that Creationist claims are not addressed?

 

[Shermana]

Their claims have been addressed time and time again. They simply ignore that fact. So what's left? As Nietzsche said in a somewhat different context, when someone doesn't listen to reason and evidence, one is permitted to inquire about their psychology.

Yes, and they have rebuttals for those claims that are "addressed time and time again". So your Nietzsche quote equally applies to the other side. They present evidence and reason that the evolutionists just want to brush off and hand wave without actually getting into it. Especially when it comes to the Creationist science articles. They won't even touch them. They just hope to brush off the source as if that's that. I should add, as a Psychology degree holder, I could make plenty of claims about the average Evolutionist. Basically, you're in fact trying to justify personal ad hominem in addition to trying to justify an attempt to completely avoid the actual debate. The picture being painted is quite clear.

But I get the feeling that you are in fact attempting to justify this behavior, even with new threads with new people. That speaks volumes.

If this is how you want to do it, I recommend you get rid of your Evolution vs Creation debate section, since you're obviously not interested in maintaining anything close to a semblance of actual debate on the issue. Just call it "Creationist whack a mole" instead and be done with it, the honesty would be appreciated.

 

[Sha'irullah]

We just keep seeing the same variations of misrepresentation, dishonesty and plain ignorance keep attempting to have the upper ground over fact and research.

It gets old fast, and takes a lot out of our patience.

In fact, this so-called controversy is far more interesting and substantial as a sociological phenomenom than as anything relating to cosmology, biology or even theology.

Amen to this

 

[idav]

Are evolutionists not interested in actual debate on this subject?

I love debating this subject, probably one of the main reasons for my bloated post count.

Are evolutionists simply looking to have a good bashing time without any of that pesky debate involved?

I actually look for any good debates creationists have to offer. Unfortunately a lot of it is the creationists hiding in gaps of science.

Are evolutionists simply content to go by an appeal to authority of the provenly-overwhelmingly-atheist-majority as if that alone settles all evolution debates?

Most theists seem to be evolutionary theists.

Why even have sections on debates between evolutionists and creationists if evolutionists aren't remotely interested in mature, solid discussions and simply want to make it attack fests?

I try to avoid personal attacks and try to stick to debating. What I see a lot of is creationists simply ignoring the often repeated evolutionary facts.

Is the basis of the evolutionist point of view simply to try to ridicule the Creationist point in hopes of relieving themselves of the actual need to debaet their claims, as if they can just say "Oh Creation.com is all lies" and that's that?

I'd advise using more sources than creation.com but do what you must.

Is this an honest method of debate? Or is this simply a tell-tale evidence of total intellectual dishonesty, vitriol-based tactics and laziness?

On the side of the creationists, probably.

 

[Shermana]

How intellectually honest of you is it to pretend that Creationist claims have not been addressed on this forum? Have you ever read any of Painted Wolf's posts? Or any of the other members who have painstakingly addressed Creationist claims on this very forum? If not, why not? And, if so, why do you persist in saying that Creationist claims are not addressed?

I've dealt with Painted Wolf on many occasions. She has not taken on everything, she's had some decent insights. There are times she even helped bolster my own case such as agreeing with what I said about Whale pelvic bones being used for mating. I have yet to see anyone but Painted Wolf however who is remotely on cue to this debate, who is civil to say the least.

However, I have yet to see a painstaking rebuttal to the actual Creationist science page links I've posted. For the most part, all I ever see is a few talking points repeated over and over again, without actually addressing what I bring up. Or claims like "You're not understanding what's in that article" like my article on the "Speed Limits on Evolution".

Now if you want to talk about intellectual honesty, then let's have a new section called "Take on the Creationist science pages", where people have to actually address what's being stated and can't just dive straight for the source as if that's all they need to disprove.

Otherwise, it's quite clear that you're attempting to justify incivility and avoidance of actual Creationist arguments. You're acting as if just because a Creationist argument has been used before, a new Creationist's post cannot be given respect to have decent debate. It's quite telling.

 

[Sha'irullah]

In most debates I have seen *edit* it only involves the Creationist misrepresenting evolution and ignoring basic facts and telling the evolution what he or she believes.

Most evolutionists on forums are not angry or use personal attacks. As a whole they just laugh and mock creationist claims. Mostly a comedic relief.

 

[Sunstone]

Yes, and they have rebuttals for those claims that are "addressed time and time again". So your Nietzsche quote equally applies to the other side. They present evidence and reason that the evolutionists just want to brush off and hand wave without actually getting into it. Especially when it comes to the Creationist science articles. They won't even touch them. They just hope to brush off the source as if that's that. I should add, as a Psychology degree holder, I could make plenty of claims about the average Evolutionist. Basically, you're in fact trying to justify personal ad hominem in addition to trying to justify an attempt to completely avoid the actual debate. The picture being painted is quite clear.

But I get the feeling that you are in fact attempting to justify this behavior, even with new threads with new people. That speaks volumes.

If this is how you want to do it, I recommend you get rid of your Evolution vs Creation debate section, since you're obviously not interested in maintaining anything close to a semblance of actual debate on the issue. Just call it "Creationist whack a mole" instead and be done with it, the honesty would be appreciated.

Your remarks are an insult to the people on this board who have taken the time to go over in detail Creationist claims and refute them. But does that matter to you?

 

[Shermana]

I actually look for any good debates creationists have to offer. Unfortunately a lot of it is the creationists hiding in gaps of science.

Now this is an excellent subject of debate. It seems that what Evolutionists don't understand or WANT to understand is that these "Gaps" represent holes in their beliefs that don't allow quite as solid of a conclusion of the so-called "overwhelming evidence" that they'd like to believe represents the case. Meanwhile, if a Creationist argument has "Gaps", you can be as sure as Epigenetics that they will harp on that like a vulture.

Most theists seem to be evolutionary theists.

Perhaps, but you could call myself an "Evolutionary Theist" in that I believe Epigenetics is how we see such diversity even in a small timeframe. However, among those Evolutionary Theists, you won't see too many advocating total random naturalism as is espoused by most non-Theist evolutionists.

I try to avoid personal attacks and try to stick to debating. What I see a lot of is creationists simply ignoring the often repeated evolutionary facts.

Well glad that you avoid personal attacks, that's a rarity among Evolutionists. However, the question of what exactly these "Evolutionary facts" are is a whole subject of debate. What I see is evolutionists ignoring the "Creation Science" concepts as if they can just write them off for being from the likes of Michael Behe, who is otherwise an Associate Professor at a standard University.

I'd advise using more sources than creation.com but do what you must.

I do, I often use scientific papers when addressing points like showing how big of gaps there actually are, like with the issue of Bat wings and the development of the arched foot.

On the side of the creationists, probably.

Well then you haven't seen how Evolutionists act generally.

 

[Shermana]

Your remarks are an insult to the people on this board who have taken the time to go over in detail Creationist claims and refute them. But does that matter to you?

Your remarks are an attempt to justify vitrolic attacks on anyone who dares even offer an attempt at mature and rationale debate on the subject.

Show me some posts other than by Painted wolf of an actual deconstruction of a Creationist argument and some posters who you think have done more than just repeat unsubstianted general talking points.

If this is the case, your entire forum is an insult to anyone who wants an opposing view. Just rename it to "Creationist Bashing forum" and be done with it.

 

[Willamena]

In most debates I have seen *edit* it only involves the Creationist misrepresenting evolution and ignoring basic facts and telling the evolution what he or she believes.

Most evolutionists on forums are not angry or use personal attacks. As a whole they just laugh and mock creationist claims. Mostly a comedic relief.

Dude... Refrring to creationists claims as "comic relief" is a personal attack.

 

[Poeticus]

Dude... Refrring to creationists claims as "comic relief" is a personal attack.

Namaste,

For real? (sorry to interrupt, please forgive me, Lady Willamena)

M.V.