"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 ?"
"Sure you do , probably due to ignorance , but none the less"
"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 ."