Originally Posted by Mordred
And these are all things about my personality I take pride in. It's because of these things that I think I am very open minded. I've even openly admitted to a) knowing nothing about creationism and consequently b) asking creationist posters here for their input. And that's what I'm still asking. As I've said previously however, if it's somehow a hurtful topic I'll lay off. But I'd like to know about creationism and I hope that if you disagree with some point I've made you'll chime in and explain why. In turn, I hope you understand if you make a point I disagree with I might chime in and politely explain why. I'm certainly not out to hurt you and I'm sorry that my posting habits have led you to the conclusion that I am a close minded person. I had thought a close minded person in this debate would jump in and say that you're wrong and that your beliefs are silly. Period. I'm not saying that and I never will.
This isn't a chatroom; it's a forum. There are plenty of threads here discussing many topics. So long as a thread isn't "closed", you can post in it.

I have defended the history of the flood and other things. If you think I, or any other creationist can be "easily backed into a corner" there appears to be an easy way to find out.

In my experience, it has been the person who advances untrue stories who can be cornered. It often happens that untrue stories contradict themselves, and all one needs to do is point this out.

As the creation events took place in the past, the primary methods of investigating them are historic methods. http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=34641#Post34641 is a thread where I have tried to make this clear. As a newcomer, it may seem strange that anticreationists are averse to history, even to the discussion of how history should be investigated. If you take the time to learn more about the issues, it will quickly become evident that evolutionism is incompatible with proper historic methods.

It is also incompatible with proper scientific methods, as we've demonstrated in many other threads, but this is harder to see because of the many smokescreens and nebulous terminologies that have evolved over the decades.


Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson