"1 ) Refuse to comment upon scientific procedures . 1 . ) Refusing to comment on scientific procedure means absolutely nothing . Maybe we do n't have anything to say . But if you have nothing to say , then how can you refute the point . Yet this does n't stop creationists from attempting to refute established scientific facts with misinformation , ignorance and outright lies . 2 ) When faced with hard facts , move the argument to either a emotional ground , or question the personal , non-scientific beliefs of the evolution believer . 2 . ) Testing your beliefs of your own scientific conclusions is not wrong . Duo_Maxwell 's point is when creationists are incapable of refuting a fact that disproves their worldview , they switch to non scientific tactics that have nothing to do with the veracity of the scientific theory in an attempt to confuse the issue . Such as you did in another thread when you asked `` WOULD YOU BET YOUR LIFE ON IT ? `` Theories in science are continuously tested and in over 150 years the theory of evolution has NOT been falsified . 3 ) Lie like there is no tomorrow 3 . ) I do n't lie dude . Sure you do , probably due to ignorance , but none the less ...... You said in another thread `` My point exactly . Carbon dating is by no means accurate , there it does not refute creationism. `` Carbon dating and radiometric dating are very accurate . But like any tool , when used improperly , they wo n't give accurate results . But when used properly , they give excellent data . How do we know they are accurate , because they are cross checked , they are verified by other dating methods . Samples that are dated by radiometric dating methods are dated by more than one method before a date is reached . For a sample to be dated by 2 different isotopes and both isotopes are flawed yet give the same date range is simply impossible . Carbon dating ( which is only good for about 50,000 years ) is checked against ice core samples , dendochronology , lake varves , just to name a few other dating methods , and it is virtually always verified . For all these different dating methods to be wrong and still give us the same dates just ca n't happen . 4 ) Refuse to acknowledge anything they simply do n't like 4 . ) Because we do n't give the response you would like is not wrong . No , creationists ignore the data that refutes their points . 5 ) When faced with a point they can not use # 2 on , ignore it completely like it does not exist 5 . ) Do n't think so Then you 've done no research on the subject and have n't read many of the creatinist posts on forums like this one . You did it yourself in the thread where you said this about carbon dating : `` I did n't ignore the quote , I just do n't believe it . There have been many inaccurate test. `` You do n't believe it why ? Have you studied the evidence , do you know how carbon dating works , have you ever carbon dated something and explained the flaws ? No , the only reason you do n't believe it is because it destroys the possiblity of a young earth . You ignore the evidence , sweep it all away with an unsupported `` I do n't believe it `` , that is exactly what point 5 is saying . 6 ) Classical ad-naeseum 6 . ) The only thing classical ad-naeseum is your own preconceived idea's of creationism and creationist . Preconceived ideas ? ! ? You forget that up until 200 years ago , creationism was the accepted model , based on PRECONCEIVED ideas taken from the Bible . But christian geologists started to look at the evidence and found that the earth could not possibly be only a few thousand years old and there never could have been a global flood . And in all the time since , there has been no evidence found that supports a young earth or global flood and mountains of evidence that refute both . Science is n't about preconceived ideas , science is about finding an explaination for the available data , even if that explaination destroys cherished , PRECONCEIVED ideas that are found to be false . So let 's hear what preconceived ideas science has that are refuted by the evidence ........."
"Why is it when Creo 's do n't believe something , Evo 's always think because they have studies or what have you that we Creo 's have to accept it as proof . I mean you do n't accept anything as proof from Creo 's . If Creo 's did some carbon testing and did it accurately and got some anomaly 's , you 'd still reject it . I did n't lie not even by ignorance . I just do n't believe it 's true , but I take it I 'm not allowed my beliefs . What fact has disproved my worldview , my worldview is intact as it ever has been ?"
"Refuse to comment Maybe we do n't have anything to say ."
"Creo 's do n't believe something do n't accept anything"