TRTL,

<<...I don't think the many, many creationists out there can simply be explained as a mental illness. In many cases, it's because they've been raised that way.>>

“Mental illness” is a pretty harsh way of putting it. I prefer the term “thinking disorder”.

I don’t think “because they've been raised that way” discludes anyone with such bizarre beliefs from being considered to have a thinking disorder.

Parents can quite easily raise their children to have a thinking disorder. For example, if a parent were to continuously tell their child that they were fat (whether or not they were) and that they needed to lose weight, then there’s a high chance that that child will eventually become an anorexic.

<<There are few things that get me riled up, but one of them is people who refuse to try to understand other points of view.>>

I can certainly relate to that, but I’m not sure what that has to do with the following...

<<As an example, although I don't really believe in a god, I can't rule out a god - provided it doesn't contradict what exists in the world around us. The idea of a god, even the Christian god seems possible if they're the kind of god that sets in motion things like evolution.>>

I think you’re being way too generous here. While technically, no one can rule out the existence of a god or gods, and although I don’t think we can really put a number on it, I think - from what we can objectively observe, and by applying our practical knowledge - the chances that a god, or specifically the Christian god, exists would be in the order of a 0.000000000000001% chance (give or take). So for all intents and purposes, I think we can say that the Christian god does not exist.

Given that Christians have had over a thousand years to give some sort of evidence for their god and have so far come up with nothing, I don’t think they deserve your generosity there. You’re giving them an undeserved validity.

Hi Olly,

I love reading your posts.
You're one of the people who's taught me
that the only cure for eudcation and information,
is more education and information! :-)!

and yet with millions and millions of fossils still not one transitional fossil (except for the frauds made up by deceitful men). You really have to be desperate, naive or both to swallow this unscientific crap.

Foxy,
For more education and information:
"The Rhetoric of Charles Darwin"
Interview with John Angus Campbell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_esXHcinOdA

This post illustrates the problem of trying to get beyond opposing dogmatists duking it out.
Campbell recognises both the genius of Darwin and the danger of dogmatism.

Dear Proxy,

Thanks for that and for your kind words
on other threads. (I especially liked
the poem):-)!

On many levels you have failed to follow your own boundaries set in the article. You encourage others to be 'civil' yet refer to the creation theory as a 'fable', hardly 'Civil' as you suggest others to be.

Same old for all including yourself in this forum. Ignorance breeds fear, which breed anger, (Secondary emotion created by primary emotion, (spradlin, 2005). As has been obvious in the evolution debate, this is one very unscientific claim that a pair of hips link an animal to the human form. Further, this is the claim of one individual, what is he scientifically supporting that with? Intersetingly a very signficant point you miss is that despite the existence of animal life that resembles human form, the human remains exclusively the dominant and only superior species in the world....

Also, the fable you speak of....is a living word....try to be a little more respectful of the faith that your nation was founded on!