Evolutionist style

Evolutionists, or believers in the theory of evolution, have a trademark style of argument that includes:

* Insistence on censorship of any and all opposing evidence and viewpoints, and retaliation against anyone who dares to disagree
* Attempted proof by assertion. The classic case of such conduct was Sir Charles Lyell's advocacy of uniformitarianism, which establishes the required deep time scale and as such is the very linchpin of the evolutionary paradigm.
* Argumentum ad hominem, or excessive personal attacks that often include childish name-calling and personal put-downs, more so than other debaters
* Proof by authority, or highlighting their own academic credentials or those of their allies in support of their theories. An academic credential can include anything from a publishing credit (especially in a "peer-reviewed" journal) to a degree to a particular academic appointment. However, Ben Stein (Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed) shows that evolutionists add this twist: they systematically deny to others, whenever they can, any opportunity to acquire similar credentials.
* Use of bizarre jargon such as "quote mining," "moving the goalposts" and "fundies"; use of incoherent phrases like "unconvincingly hysterical"
* Inordinate attempt to demonize the other side, as in overuse of the term creationist and fundamentalist. The latter example includes the attempt to show that Christian fundamentalists are morally equivalent to Muslim fundamentalists, whether in their extreme rejection of modernity or in their practice and advocacy of terrorism.
* An astounding lack of understanding—or denial—of how most great scientists and mathematicians either rejected evolution or were silent about it
* An equal lack of understanding, or denial, that most of the greatest scientists in the Western world asserted the reality of creation and the Great Flood prior to the Enlightenment, or else a denial that their scientific achievements (including those of Sir Isaac Newton!) matter today.
* Frequent reliance on circular reasoning, as in defining evolution as change and survival of the fittest as those who survive
* Projection--figuratively "throwing off" their own faults on the other side, in that they accuse the other side of doing the very things that they themselves do.
* Claiming to enjoy scientific debate while refusing to debate creationists.
* Refusing to allow the possibility that God exists.
* Claiming that so-called "Theistic evolution" is possible, which would indicate that the events that took place in Genesis are false (meaning God lied about them) or allegoric.
* Ignoring the clear historical link between Darwinism, Eugenics, and the Holocaust.
* Deliberate ignorance about phenomena that evolution cannot explain, such as remarkable migration and homing, or the existence of the whale.
* Claim that the theory of evolution can be used as an applied science, like the development of flu vaccines, but continuing to support the theory when the application fails.[1]

v • d • e

Creation vs. evolution

Evolution|

Evolution • Evolutionism • Universal common ancestry • Social Darwinism • Eugenics • Evolutionary racism • Naturalism • Abiogenesis • Charles Darwin • Schools and evolution • Atheism and Evolution • Theory of evolution and liberalism • Theistic Evolution •

Hoaxes, Controversies, and Debates|

Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation • Piltdown Man •Starlight issue • Nebraska Man • Haeckel diagrams • Liberalism • Archaeoraptor

Creation science and Creationism|

Creationism • Intelligent Design • Creation Science • Christianity and Science • Baraminology • Flood Geology • Irreducible Complexity • Young Earth Creationism • Old Earth Creationism • Duane Gish • Creation •

## References[edit]

1. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/opinion/20sun3.html?ref=opinion