It comes down to preconceptions:
Creationists already believe they know how the world came to be, so the evidence must be made to fit this preconception.
Prior to Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection, there was no preconception in favour of evolutionary development, in fact Darwin was scoffed at by officers on HMS Beagle for his strong religious convictions. So, the evidence did not have to fit any preconception, but instead scientists made sense of what they saw by developing theories of evolution.
They have the evidence yet they will never be convinced while under the influence of a ideology that lies to them. To them evolution is not only false it is evil and their view of evolution is so skewed by this ideological nonsense that there is little hope for this generation of creationists, though we may save some of their children. Most religions made peace with evolution a long time ago, but creationists, being literalistic, must have every word of the bible be true as if one thing is not true then all is not true. Dichotomous thinking such as this is the mark if the unintelligent and uneducated.
Perceptions of intelligence are subjective and influenced by personal beliefs and biases. Some may view creationists as "dumb" because they disagree with scientific evidence and principles. It is important to approach differing beliefs with respect and understanding.
His theory doesn't fit with their ideas. They usually use the Bible to answer questions that science already has or is working on. These are questions that are not scientific questions but ones that are best debated and answered by philosophy.
Evolution is supported by a wealth of scientific evidence from multiple fields such as paleontology, genetics, and comparative anatomy. It provides a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth and has predictive power in guiding research and understanding the natural world. Scientists accept evolution based on the strength of this evidence and its explanatory power.
Evolutionists study and accept the scientific theory of evolution, which explains how organisms change over time through natural selection and genetic variation. They believe that all living organisms share a common ancestor and that evolution is driven by processes such as mutation, gene flow, and genetic drift. Evolutionists view the fossil record, comparative anatomy, and molecular evidence as supporting evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of life on Earth.
Evolutionists believe that scientific evidence supports the Theory of Evolution. Creationists believe the Theory of Evolution contradicts the Biblical story of creation and, therefore, fight against its acceptance. Scientists, even those who accept the existence of God and the validity of the Bible, believe that a scientific theory must be supported by evidence. It's not a case of anyone debunking anyone. Scientists and Creationists alike start off with personal beliefs: scientists in science and creationists in the Biblical account of creation. Neither is without bias and both attempt to find evidence that supports their core beliefs.
Scientific conclusions are based on scientific evidence.
they are being presented to difference audiences apex
They rely on there conclusions based on observations.
Evolutionists use the classification system to show the hierarchical relationships between organisms, highlighting the shared ancestry and evolutionary history among different species. By showcasing how organisms are grouped based on their shared characteristics, evolutionists argue that this classification system provides evidence for common descent and the process of evolution.
If you find evidence that supports opposing conclusions based on your research question, weigh the evidence for both conclusions and pick the one you think is most convincing.
If you find evidence that supports opposing conclusions based on your research question, weigh the evidence for both conclusions and pick the one you think is most convincing.
When reaching conclusions based on evidence, it is important to consider the reliability and quality of the evidence, as well as any potential biases that may be present. It is also crucial to follow a systematic and logical process of analysis to ensure that the conclusions are well-founded and supported by the evidence. Communication of the conclusions should be clear and transparent, highlighting the key findings and the reasoning behind them.
An argument can have one or multiple conclusions, depending on the complexity of the reasoning and the evidence presented.
Weigh the evidence for both conclusions and decide which has the most merit
True. Conclusions related to historical events are based on evaluating existing evidence such as documents, artifacts, and eyewitness accounts. These conclusions are subject to change as new evidence is discovered or alternative interpretations are considered.
Conclusions are a take away from the experiment and are effective strategies to "sum up" the evidence.