Night Owl Mk. II

HomeSite 4.0
Created with Allaire HomeSite 4.0

Last Update: 29 Dec 99

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).

[RE: Firing Line Evolution vs. Creationism debate]
(R) It looked like a pretty worthless debate. I do not think either side said anything of importance.
(MB) I would disagree. Those supporting evolution made many solid arguments and refuted all of the standard nonsense brought up by the Creationists. It was an impressive performance -- especially given the fact of a hostile forum on Buckley's show.

(R) Creationist do not accepts facts that evolutionist do. They have their reasons and some are valid.
(MB) Creationist don't accept facts because they are not interested in fact. They are interested in the preservation of their cherished dogma and they can't have that if they accept reality.

(R) Evolutionist do no accept fact that creationist do. They seem to have a lesser degree of proof required of the fossil record than creationist.
(MB) Creationists have no facts, so there's nothing to dispute other than their rhetoric. Creationists do not have standards of proof for the fossil record. What they have are demands that it satisfy impossible criteria. Then, when those criteria aren't satisfied, they declare the whole of evolution to be refuted. Have you ever noticed that Creationists don't apply the same arguments about burden of proof to their own ideas?

(R) It looks like neither changed each others mind. And I do not think it was productive at all.
(MB) The purpose of these debates is not to change the minds of the participants. Indeed, the reason each person is there is because of their solid support of their side of the issue. The purpose is to present and refute arguments and let the listeners decide who has made the better case.

(R) Stalemate
(MB) In this particular debate, the evolutionists clearly won by any objective standard.

Created with Allaire HomeSite 4.0 .......... Last Update: 29 Dec 99

Earthlink Network Home Page