Night Owl Mk. II

Return to "Evolution vs. Creationism" essay

Back to Philosophy page

Please feel free to E-mail me with your own comments on this issue or on anything else included in my Philosophy of Life section. Debate is good!

Please report any problems with this page to the Webmaster!


Boldfaced statements are parts of the original essay (or a subsequent reply) to which the respondent has directed his comments.

Italicized/emphasized comments
prefaced by (R) are those of the respondent and are presented unedited.

My replies appear under the respondent's comments in blue text and are prefaced by my initials (MB).

(R) As a general skeptic, I fail to see any evidence in your writings on Creationism vs. Evolution. You say that Creationist arguments have been shot down. I want details. What arguments were shot down and by what findings. Maybe your page was only designed to put forth your opinions, but I think it would be very interesting to hear the evidence which helped you develop your opinions.
(MB) A very legitimate request. The arguments against evolution that are levied by Creationists are very numerous. Several have been presented by their proponents in these replies and I have addressed each of them. Since there are so many more which have yet to be presented and rebutted here, and since I would likely run out of web space on my ISP long before I could address them all, may I suggest a few web sites where you can get the details that you desire? Several good ones are listed under the "Skepticism" column on my Exit/Links page. The best place to begin would be the Talk.Origins Archive.

(R) I agree with your comment about the person who said they wouldn't believe something even if it was proven true. However, it works both ways. I have heard the same comments from atheists about Christianity.
(MB) You are correct. Such attitudes are wrong no matter which views are involved. The only intellectually valid method is to examine the evidence on all sides and reach any conclusions based upon that evidence. Personal presuppositions and the appeal of emotion must be left out of the process. In my case, I'm willing to accept anything that passes the test of critical examination.

(R) My opinion: If someone REALLY believes something to be true, then the truth shouldn't make them feel threatened. In fact, if something is true, pure science will eventually reveal it to be true.
(MB) Agreed. One should never fear truth. If one prefers fairy tales, it may make him feel better, but he will be willingly living a lie.

(R) I believe that there are places in the Bible that are literal and historical fact, and other places that aren't to be taken literally.
(MB) Absolutely. The Bible's historical accounts can be supported by independent evidence. The rest is little more than a good story.

(R) Common sense and logic can dictate how to interpret a passage. The problem with many people is that they form STRONG opinions on the Bible without using either of those qualities(this includes Bible-believers, atheists, agnostics and everyone in between.
(MB) Correct again. Normally, these are the folks who tend to use emotional appeal as the basis for their decision-making.

(R) Back to the point, I would appreciate if you could publish specific findings, arguments, etc. along with sources. If not, maybe you could send me a list in an e-mail message.
(MB) Please check the web-based sources I mentioned above. If you want more, or if there are any specific claims that you would like me address here, please let me know. There is certainly a plethora of information available on this issue.

Created with Allaire HomeSite 4.0 .......... Last Update: 04 Jun 98

Earthlink Network Home Page