How to Argue Like a Creationist

Please note that Mark Harpt requested that I add a link here to his site so that he can refute the accuasations below.

I would ask that all fair-minded people check Mark's site here. Obviously I have no control over what Mark posts there, any more than he controls what I put here. Caveat emptor.

Similarly, it has been pointed out that there is an archive of Mark Harpt's posts kept by Jim Lippard. Click Part 1 and Part 2 to get them. Caveat emptor redux.

--D.

1. Make outrageous claims, but don't dare to support them. Make other people prove them wrong.
2. Keep repeating your claims. People will believe them eventually.
3. If someone asks you specific questions about one of your claims, make up answers.
4. When presented with evidence that contradicts your claims, trivialize it. Say, "ha ha! you only presented X pieces of evidence!" Hope they won't notice that you presented none.
5. When caught in an error, redefine the English language to accommodate the error.
6. Refuse to provide references for any claim unless at least 10 people ask for them.
7. When producing your reference, assuming you have one, provide a vague citation with no page numbers or publisher information.
8. By all means, do not transcribe the contents of a supporting reference on your own, even if it's only 2 sentences. Make others do your work for you. They probably won't bother.
9. If somebody actually bothers to look up your reference, misrepresent it. Say it "implied" what you claimed, even if it claimed the opposite.
10. When the chorus of challenges grows loud, divert attention away from the challenges by whining about name-calling.
11. Before complaining about name-calling, call your opponents names like "liar" and "history revisionist".
12. Leave talk.origins, come back a few months later, change the topic of discussion, and hope nobody remembers how well you applied these techniques the last time you were there.
13. Killfile people who provide particularly effective criticisms, so you do not have to listen to them and can plead ignorance about their comments. [Andrew MacRae]
14. After avoiding a direct question once, with one of the above techniques, claim that you've "already answered that question" if anyone asks it again. [Doug Turnbull]
15. In lieu of argument, refer readers to http://www.superb.com/~markh/. [Loren Petrich]
16. Claim you have "killfiled" someone, even though the headers on your messages show you are using a newsreader which doesn't support killfiles. [Paul Farrar]
17. When the going gets tough, start a new thread and reiterate your original assertion as fact. After a while, consolidate your threads and repeat. [Michael Keane]
18. Go on (or pretend to go on) a vacation or trip. When you return, repeat all the same assertions as fact. Forget or ignore all the criticisms that were made before you left. [Michael Keane]
19. When somebody asks you, weeks later, for evidence of an earlier claim, say "I already dealt with that in an earlier article." [Russell Stewart]
20. Write a hit-and-run article. Claim to have disproved all your opponents' arguments and then refuse to answer anymore relevant questions or challenges.
21. If someone disagrees with you, use the "Philosophy 101" argument from authority. Pretend all great philosophers and scientists have endorsed your argument, even when practically none have.
22. Call your opponents biased against Christianity. If someone disagrees with you, then that person obviously hates Christians.
23. Have all your past articles purged from Usenet archiving services like DejaNews. That way, there will be no record of you losing all your arguments.
24. If absolutely, irrevocably proven wrong on some fundamental point, claim that said point was actually "minor". [Dan Breslau]
25. Quote your opponent out of context so it appears that he's actually agreeing with you, even though he's actually shattered your argument.