Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Anyone notice that many people are scientifically illiterate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="driewerf" data-source="post: 77537732" data-attributes="member: 258809"><p>I got the idea of rather isolating leading creationists, rather than convincing them after watching some “debates” between science defenders and Kent Hovind. Too often I saw the science defender trying to convince Kent Hovind, explaining and arguing with him. Which felt more and more like an exercise in futility. There is no point of convincing someone as Kent Hovind. First, because it is his source of income he has every incentive to not change his opinion (or at least, his presentations). Second, that would be only one (aging) individual. Much more important are his followers. After all, they are plenty and provide his resources. Therefor exposing his errors, dirty tricks and lies in front of his followers should be the prime tactic.</p><p>The same applies of course to Ken Ham, Ray Comfort, John Pendleton etc.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="driewerf, post: 77537732, member: 258809"] I got the idea of rather isolating leading creationists, rather than convincing them after watching some “debates” between science defenders and Kent Hovind. Too often I saw the science defender trying to convince Kent Hovind, explaining and arguing with him. Which felt more and more like an exercise in futility. There is no point of convincing someone as Kent Hovind. First, because it is his source of income he has every incentive to not change his opinion (or at least, his presentations). Second, that would be only one (aging) individual. Much more important are his followers. After all, they are plenty and provide his resources. Therefor exposing his errors, dirty tricks and lies in front of his followers should be the prime tactic. The same applies of course to Ken Ham, Ray Comfort, John Pendleton etc. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Anyone notice that many people are scientifically illiterate
Top
Bottom