Open Page for Creationist Questions

Willkommen, bienvenue, welcome, come on in. spacer

This is a page set up just for creationists to ask questions about evolution. While I am not a scientist I am a very knowledgeable layperson who has been studying not only evolutionary theory but also creationist objections to it for over 20 years. So barring access to an actual working evolutionary biologist or paleontologist (who generally feel that talking to creationists is a waste of their time) I am your guy.

First a few simple, and I think reasonable, ground rules (they are similar to my comment policy for my blog) which will be applied to everyone creationist or evolutionist:

1. No threats (direct or indirect) or name-calling; attack ideas not individuals.

2. No spamming; one question at a time please! Comments that are laundry-lists of objections to evolution will be shortened (edited) to the first question. You can ask your other questions after I have addressed the current one.

3. Ask a question; no speeches please, that is the prerogative of the author.

4. No link bombing; I am not here as a clearinghouse for other people’s blogs or pages. Ask your own questions.

5. No proselytizing; I am not looking to have theological discussions; this page is for questions about science.

6. Please keep the questions to evolutionary biology or directly related subjects such as paleontology. Questions about physics or cosmology (Big Bang Theory) are best taken elsewhere, as I have only a basic knowledge of those subjects. I may grant some leeway on this but do not push it.

[The rules may be updated at anytime, however new rules will not be retroactively enforced.]

I am a civil libertarian and thus a strong advocate for freedom of speech so I am strongly inclined to give people a lot of latitude. No one will be banned for merely asking questions or disagreement. However, this is my blog not a public space so if you want to post here take care to abide by my rules and heed my warnings.

Also please note that if I find your question worthy I may move my response to a blog posting.

OK, having made you welcome and explained the ground rules, I invite you to ask away in the comments section below.

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    • Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)

30 thoughts on “Open Page for Creationist Questions”

  1. Pingback: New page for creationist questions! | Playing Chess with Pigeons

  2. spacer gravelinspector-Aidan says:

    Hi Troy,
    Did the Creationists evolve into tumbleweed and intellectual cowardice, or is it quiet reound here?
    And if so, why do we still have intellectual cowardice amongst tumbleweed?

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • spacer Troy Britain says:

      Having thought about it a little I have decided that your comment is a little too close to name calling. Please refrain from making blanket statements about creationists being intellectual cowards. I want to make this a safe space for them (didn’t you see the cute, reassuring kitten above?).

      Thanks.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • spacer gravelinspector-Aidan says:

        Hi, Troy,
        I understand and accept your points. However I still see nothing other than tumbleweed on the local scenery.
        We both know, from previous dealings (FYI: yes, I was on CI$; BTW, have you heard from Jon Wolff in the last few years. Or even Martin Yirrel?) with C*ts that the ones with whom we can enter a constructive dialogue are NOT the ones at the core of the problem : the real problem is the ones who choose to not engage with the evidence.
        To snip lots of ” blahblahblahblahblahblah…. “, we both know that there are a depressingly large number of C*ts who refuse to engage with evidence of any sort which may lead to counter-faith conclusions. To quote I-forget-whom, possibly Mencken, “You cannot reason someone out of a position at which they did not arrive by a process of reason.”
        I see what you’re trying to achieve with this blog. Sadly, I suspect that it is doomed to failure.

        Anyway, good to be back in contact, of sorts. Fight the good fight! I look forward to seeing you on Jerry Coyne’s “WhyEvolutionIsTrue” blog in future (sorry ; Jerry insists that it’s a “website”, not a “blog” ; it’s a Jerry-ism, as is the predilection for cats and near absence of d*gs).

        Life could be worse – in America, you think of tumbleweed : in Scotland we have midges ; as lightweight, but much more persistent and annoying. And more numerous too!

        (Now trying to remember Jon Wolff’s site … Google is my friend! I occasionally swap words with Les Howarth. Remember Marijke the island-dwelling mathematician? Cancer, I’m afraid. and our wrist-slapping he-who-must-be-obeyed “TLC” ; not had any contact for years.)
        Regards,
        Aidan
        (In, IIRC, “sub-tropical Aberdeen)

        THIS time, I remembered to tick the “new posts by email” box!

        LikeLike

        Reply
        • spacer Troy Britain says:

          Hi Aidan,

          I understand and accept your points. However I still see nothing other than tumbleweed on the local scenery. We both know, from previous dealings (FYI: yes, I was on CI$…

          Ah yes! Good times, good times…

          BTW, have you heard from Jon Wolff in the last few years. Or even Martin Yirrel?

          Haven’t heard from Jon for years, never for Martin I’m afraid. Still talk to Ed Brayton (“St. Cynic”) now and again.

          To snip lots of ” blahblahblahblahblahblah…. “, we both know that there are a depressingly large number of C*ts who refuse to engage with evidence of any sort which may lead to counter-faith conclusions. To quote I-forget-whom, possibly Mencken, “You cannot reason someone out of a position at which they did not arrive by a process of reason.” I see what you’re trying to achieve with this blog. Sadly, I suspect that it is doomed to failure.

          I am not expecting to convert the hard-core types, rather I write for the fence sitters and misguided but still reachable types. There is still hope for some.

          That and I learn myself doing the research to write my responses. :-)

          Take it easy my friend.

          LikeLike

          Reply
  3. spacer Jon Woolf says:

    Hiya, guys! Long time no type — I check in here every now and then, but rarely have much of anything to say. Troy, I’ve tried to email you a few times over the years, but never got any response. I’m still on CIS — the current incarnation of CIS, that is, which is a set of web forums. I’m the contract-holder for SciMath now. Tom LeCompte left a couple of years ago, and they offered the contract to me; I took it because I couldn’t bear to see the old place shut down completely. We don’t get much traffic these days, a lot of the regulars are gone, but you’re both welcome to come by whenever you like. And bring some friends, too — as long as you keep it within the rules, I’d love to have some folks to discuss geology, fossils, dinosaurs, evolution, etc. with again!

    — Jon Woolf

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • spacer Troy Britain says:

      Hi Jon!

      Troy, I’ve tried to email you a few times over the years, but never got any response.

      You have? Hmmm, I don’t remember that, I’ll have to check my spam folder. Every now and then Outlook dumps legit emails in there.

      I’m still on CIS — the current incarnation of CIS, that is, which is a set of web forums. I’m the contract-holder for SciMath now.

      You’re kidding, that is still around?

      We don’t get much traffic these days, a lot of the regulars are gone, but you’re both welcome to come by whenever you like.

      I’ll take a look but I won’t promise to participate. I don’t spend much time in discussion forums any more. I only recently engaged a few creationists on Ken Ham’s Facebook page (because he posted pics of me “protesting” one of his shindigs) but other than that I usually stick to going after the “big guns” on my blog (when I can work my self up to it).

      Anyway, good to hear from you Jon, I hope you’re doing well!

      LikeLike

      Reply
    • spacer gravelinspector-Aidan says:

      Hi Jon, Signed up again. Some old familiar names.

      LikeLike

      Reply
  4. spacer John says:

    If I evolved from a monkey, then why don’t I like bananas?

    Thanks,
    Daniel

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • spacer Troy Britain says:

      spacer

      If you’re serious (and not a Poe) let me know and I will answer.

      LikeLike

      Reply
  5. spacer gravelinspector-Aidan says:

    John-who-is-also-Daniel asked something directly out of the Creationist Training Manual (Harun Yaya edition #3) :

    If I evolved from a monkey, then why don’t I like bananas?

    Well, that doesn’t really fit within the purview of

    Please keep the questions to evolutionary biology or directly related subjects such as paleontology.

    but it seems like some sort of attempt. So here are some relevant parts of the answer.
    (1) you have only tried one sub-species of banana (almost certainly the productive but weak-tasing variety called “Cavendish”) ; there are hundreds of wild-growing varieties and several separate species of banana which are much more well-known to the monkeys from which your ape ancestors evolved, which may be more amenable to you. However, I’ve never seen anything other than the insipid “Cavendish” on sale outside Africa. Even within Africa, the “Cavendish” is becoming more common, even tough they taste pallid and are terrible to cook. Our cooks at work refuse to touch “Cavendish” because it taints the oil in the frier.
    (2) You’re an ape, which is a sub-group of “monkeys”, themselves a sub-group of primates, themselves a sub-group of mammals, themselves a sub-group of amniotes, themselves a sub-group of the tetrapods, themselves a sub-group of the teleost fishes, themselves a sub-group of the jawed-vertebrates (Gnathostomata), themselves a sub-group of the skulled vertebrates (Craniata), themselves a sub-group of the vertebrates (assuming that you have now got a backbone, or had one while an embryo), themselves a sub-group of the animal “kingdom” ; surely somewhere in that proud lineage, there are characteristics which you do like.
    (3) Many “monkeys” don’t particularly like bananas too – they can be quite a bad food for them. Leaf-eating probiscus monkeys, for example, don’t like bananas much either. You should check with a zoo’s Primate House keeper if you’re in charge of looking after a “monkey” (they’ll want to know which of the several hundred species you’re feeding).
    What is it that you object to about being evolved from a monkey? Do you not like having opposable thumbs? Backache? A complex social life? These are all traits typical of primates, as we all are.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • spacer Troy Britain says:

      Or, I could point out that Daniel/John did not as an individual evolve from a monkey but rather humans as a species share a common ancestor with monkeys (that was probably monkey-like) and there is no expectation that just because many modern monkeys may like bananas that we necessarily should, though most of us do (I believe bananas are the most popular fruit in the U.S. at least).

      Also:

      …themselves a sub-group of the teleost fishes…

      You probably want to say “sub-group of the Teleostomi“, so as not to confuse them with the Teleostei, which we are definitely not descended from.

      I don’t know who the hell thought it was a good idea to name a clade of “fishes” “Teleostomi” in the first place. The confusion this would cause should have been obvious. Personally I wouldn’t use it and in this sort of context would stick with Gnathostomata/Osteichthyes/Sarcopterygii/Tetrapoda (YMMV).

      LikeLike

      Reply