Posted: Nov 21, 2016 4:58 am
Creationists are ALWAYS working from a pre-selected conclusion backwards toward a premise they can insist will imply their conclusion. You know this because the conclusion is always the same. If you've already worked out a proper proof, then you can play it backwards, but that's not what they're doing, so your job becomes finding the step that does not proceed from the one before it.
In this case, the discovery you make about creationists is that they're incapable of storing information (all broadcast, no reception), and that's probably why they're stuck writing incoherent 'arguments', always with the same conclusion. This isn't about reasoning at all. It's obsessive. It's not that other people aren't, but sometimes there's some heavier lifting going on, and Rumraket's link to Shallit's blog shows an example of this.
In this case, the discovery you make about creationists is that they're incapable of storing information (all broadcast, no reception), and that's probably why they're stuck writing incoherent 'arguments', always with the same conclusion. This isn't about reasoning at all. It's obsessive. It's not that other people aren't, but sometimes there's some heavier lifting going on, and Rumraket's link to Shallit's blog shows an example of this.