I also note that your paraphrase is inaccurate concerning what I said about self-defense. I hope this isn't a symptom.
A symptom? Why do you belittle other posters to the extent that you do?
Your story already contradicts itself. You claim you don't know this & don't know that, yet you produce this conclusion: "But most biblical stories are clearly lessons, not real tales."
But most biblical stories are clearly lessons and not real tales. What I don't know "this or that" about is how creationism is scientific in nature. I know what creationism itself is (and what it isn't). Moreover, the bible in no way correlates with creationism. There are numerous other posters here who have all indicated that creationism serves as an umbrella for multiple religions. Given that you use the bible as evidence to support a non-Christian ideology (creationism), I can't help but get the impression that you do not know about creationism.
I count 88 threads at present in the Creation vs. Evolution forum here. Reading all of them would take most people quite a while; but one doesn't need to read every last thread to get a pretty good idea what some of the issues and evidence are about.
The vast majority of said 88 threads consist of you going off on a tirade rather than trying to discuss the matter at hand, including flaming other posters - the very thing which the new moderator has said (s)he wishes to put a stop to.
Again you present a conclusion without anything backing it up. I have not said I want creationism in school; this is something you assume.
With all due respect, who said I was talking to you when I mentioned creationism in school. The creationism movement wishes to position it in the public school system and that is what I was addressing.
The scientific aspects of creationism include historical research, scientific models, hypotheses, laws, theories, and the applications of all of these.
History is not a scientific aspect. It's history. That's a different subject.
We have a thread entitled "History Rules". I should be interested in seeing you back up your assertion that "every historian" believes in evotime.
What is evotime?
Did you happen to catch our Flat Earth thread?
Yes but the initial post doesn't really mean much. It seems to be attempting to invalidate evolution by finding fault with specific individuals. I could very well point out atrocities done by specific Christians and conclude that all Christians are bad. But they aren't all bad, nor are all evolutionists or any other group.
Isn't there a term in the debating world for people who employ this method of arguing, trying to make their opposition look bad by pointing out a few bad apples? There's also another thread about how Geoffrey Dahlmer (sp?) was an evolutionist. This in no way invalidates evolution anymore than bad Christians invalidate the Christian religion.
