Evolutionists tend to look down on Creationists. They will frequently accuse anyone who does not agree with them on the topic of origins of being stupid. This is particularly true of those who reject universal common ancestry of all life on earth, even if they agree that changes do occur as a part of a species adapting to changes in its environment. The simple fact of the matter is that if you disagree with them on any aspect of The Big Bang to man atheistic mythology, you are to be simply dismissed as an idiot. Anything you have to say is certainly not to be given any consideration beyond attacking it.
Evolutionists tend to see themselves as smart and educated.
Evolution is often taught in public schools, as well as colleges and universities. Unfortunately, more often than not they only get one side of the story. With regards to public schools, this is a result of lawsuits brought by atheists to force any alternative out. This is not about teaching creation science in public schools, if for no other reason, it would still be frequently misrepresented. The problem is more the fact that what is actually an atheistic view of origins is taught as proven scientific fact in class after class, and most students are never going to question what they are being taught. More often than not, they will simply absorb it on blind faith.
No matter how well-established a theory may be considered in science, the next generation needs to have the sense that they can question it. In fact, they need to be encouraged to question. This is because if you question a widely held idea and ultimately come to the conclusion that it's correct, you will be a far stronger supporter of it than someone that has accepted it blindly. That is true in both science and religion. Furthermore, if it proves to be false, then you could correct an error.
They are taught what to think about the evidence.
A significant part of the problem is the fact that classes tend to teach students what to think rather than how to think. When it comes to evidence, they are told what it means and not really how to come to a conclusion themselves. Certainly, from what I have read, in any situation where they were given that opportunity, if they came to the “wrong” conclusion, it would not be accepted.
The danger here is that without any sense that they are free to question what is being taught, it will lead to stagnation, because even evidence that would tend to refute the basic model would not succeed and bring it down. The result would be patches, that would simply be used to prop it up so that the theory could be passed on to the next generation has absolute fact.
They are not taught to think independently about the evidence.
It is abundantly clear that they are not being taught about thinking independently about the evidence. This is evident by the fact that you can explain an alternative perspective on the evidence to them as simply as possible and they show absolutely no sign of even understanding your perspective or even seeing that there could be a different perspective on the evidence. In fact, they frequently confuse evidence for its standard interpretation.
This means that in their mindset the evidence and the way it is interpreted are the same thing. They don't recognize the fact that different people can look at the same evidence from different perspectives and come to completely different conclusions. As a result, they literally cannot see that another interpretation is possible.
Furthermore, because they see their teachers as intelligent people, who they not only believe are totally objective, but would never steer them wrong, this means that in their eyes the only reason why somebody would disagree with what their teachers said is that they are stupid, or at least uneducated.
They conclude that anyone as educated as them will come to the same conclusion.
Because of their education and their inability to see any other interpretation of data, they tend to conclude that somebody who disagrees with them must be stupid. After all, all the people they see as smart and educated hold to the same ideas. It must mean that anyone who disagrees is dumb and uneducated. This is a form of hubris, that starts with the assumption that they are right, and that anybody who is smart and educated would agree with them. It then concludes that anyone who disagrees with them must be stupid and uneducated.
Sadly, the real fact of the matter is that they are locked into a mindset that they were actually indoctrinated into and consequently cannot get out of. In other words, they were “educated” in an environment where it is essentially “accept what we say and do not question it.” The impression becomes very clear quite quickly, when talking to some of these people that they are literally incapable of thinking outside the box. You can explain it, multiple times, and they just dig in with no indication of even understanding a different perspective can exist.
They consequently see creationists as stupid.
The consequence of this type of brainwashing and the resulting thinking is that creationists must be stupid. After all, if they weren't, they would believe the full Big Bang to man story without question. This mindset is loaded with pride, and the belief that they have to be right because after all their teachers would not have taught them all this stuff if it was not true. “
It is a conclusion that results naturally from what really constitutes a form of brainwashing, whereby giving only one side of an issue, except maybe in ridicule, that is what they learn to believe without question.
In conclusion evolutionists think that Creationists are stupid not because Creationists really are stupid, but because they had effectively been brainwashed into thinking no other way than the Big Bang to man atheistic mythology that has been presented to them. They are literally locked into a one-sided mindset.
