% that accept evolution per state

[createdtoworship]

Yes, you most certainly did, right here;

How you can possibly know whether he defines an elite scientist if you only watched 2 minutes of a 9:26 video?

I believe I answered you already here:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7831892/#post65989842

it seems you are asking the same questions over and over, I never said he didn't define an elite scientist in the entire 9:26 video, I merely said that he didn't define terms normally and upfront (in the two minutes I watched), he was speaking of terms he hadn't yet defined, which is unusual and errorsome.

 

[createdtoworship]

I take it you disagree with Dembski when he says this;

If Project Steve was meant to show that a considerable majority of the scientific community accepts a naturalistic conception of evolution, then the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) could have saved its energies—that fact was never in question. ?

It would seem you would have to disagree with him as that statement contradicts 90% of your argument.

there is no possible way for the majority of scientists to reject evolution at this moment in time, I agree with dembski. For sake of losing ones job etc, it is possibly a phobia that many evolutionist deal with when attempting to take a minority view.

let me repost an earlier post for clarity:

The reason why there are more Darwinian evolutionists is possibly due to fears of losing ones Job, or demoted/ refused to advance if you don’t comply or Fear of reprisal by evolutionary bosses.

As evidence of this claim I give two quotes:


Behe and geisler readily admit that one reason why the "more education...(the) less likely you are to reject" darwinism is


Michael Behe in the Harvard Political Review, “There’s good reason to be afraid. Even if you’re not fired from your job, you will easily be passed over for promotions. I would strongly advise graduate students who are skeptical of Darwinian theory not to make their views known.”-Harvard Political Review- 5/12/02


also: geisler admits this too:- by admitting God, or anything other than evolution:

“Darwinists would risk losing financial security and professional admiration. How so? Because there’s tremendous pressure in the academic community to publish something that supports evolution. Find something important, and you may find yourself on the cover of National Geographic or the subject of a PBS special. Find nothing, and you may find yourself out of a job, out of grant money, or at least out of favor with your materialist colleagues. So there’s a money, job security, and prestige motive to advance the Darwinian worldview.”

evolution is where the grant monies lie. There is risk in any new venture in science, nonconformity is simply not profitable (most of the time).

I have a post where I listed several names of famous scientists whose views were rejected by peer review boards at first. If you want, I will repost.

 

[createdtoworship]

have to go to work, will TTYL

 

[digitalgoth]

there is no possible way for the majority of scientists to reject evolution at this moment in time, I agree with dembski. For sake of losing ones job etc, it is possibly a phobia that many evolutionist deal with when attempting to take a minority view.

...

evolution is where the grant monies lie. There is risk in any new venture in science, nonconformity is simply not profitable (most of the time).

This isn't solar panels, alternative fuels, or breakthroughs in materials science. The "money" involved in evolutionary science is pretty limited except for primarily agriculture (Monsanto) and similar ventures that can yield profitability, like medicine.

Outside of that, there's FAR more money in creating the "next-big-thing-of-the-week" than sending people into the jungles to find a new primate to "prove" evolution.

Go write a grant proposal for "proving evolution" and I doubt many will pay you.

I think you think evolution is ALL science. No one's proving evolution anymore, and no one was then either. If you think there's billions in evolution you need a new field choice.

Do you think that grant boards sit around, giggling with evil, only funding "science" that digs up fossils? Insert picture of hooked-nose illuminati if it helps the image.

I mean, this may seem shocking but I think most science teams aren't too concerned with a few sentences in genesis.

They would much rather invent a new iPhone or a new thin film / high efficiency solar surface for their "holy grail".

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

anyway the proof is in the pudding, do you have legitimate examples of christians firing evolutionists? It usually the other way around. Those who are in their system, firing those who are out on a limb scientifically speaking. Which is my case and point. My example is near universal while yours, merely nonexistent. here is the list:

Sadly, you are way out of touch on this issue. Firings by Christian colleges of teachers of science are all too common.

The Science-Religion Crisis at Christian Colleges | Kelly James Clark

Teaching Evolution at a Christian College » Dispatches from the Culture Wars

Professors Sue Christian College After Dismissal Follows Disagreement Over Literal Adam and Eve

 

[Gracchus]

you will have to try again, I think I won this one. And it looks like just in time, (as you have run out of ammo).

You think you won? My, that's a surprise!

for one only the prior of the three is directly observable, the others are related to the study of past events.

All observations are of the past. For instance, it takes a certain amount of time for light to reach your eyes, then a certain amount of time for the retinal image to be processed, and only then can you begin to interpret what you saw.

If you are going to chop logic, you had better learn to chop it very fine.

 

[digitalgoth]

Sadly, you are way out of touch on this issue. Firings by Christian colleges of teachers of science are all too common.

The Science-Religion Crisis at Christian Colleges[bless and do not curse]|[bless and do not curse]Kelly James Clark

Teaching Evolution at a Christian College » Dispatches from the Culture Wars

Professors Sue Christian College After Dismissal Follows Disagreement Over Literal Adam and Eve

...and in conclusion, if we all work together to line up dogmatists and radicals on both sides and shoot them behind the chemical shed, we can all have happier lives...but the news will have less things to report.

 

[bhsmte]

You think you won? My, that's a surprise!


All observations are of the past. For instance, it takes a certain amount of time for light to reach your eyes, then a certain amount of time for the retinal image to be processed, and only then can you begin to interpret what you saw.

If you are going to chop logic, you had better learn to chop it very fine.

It would appear, that is part of creationism debate tactics 101 - don't leave, without declaring victory.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry if I asked tough questions you didn't want to answer (or couldn't answer). So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Is that what you said to your priest years ago?

 

[Queller]

for one only the prior of the three is directly observable, the others are related to the study of past events.

OK. So what?

 

[Queller]

there is no possible way for the majority of scientists to reject evolution at this moment in time, I agree with dembski. For sake of losing ones job etc, it is possibly a phobia that many evolutionist deal with when attempting to take a minority view.

Sorry, but you have given no evidence that scientists actually believe as Behe and Geisler contend they do.

Quoting two people as saying that academics and scientists fear losing their jobs is not evidence of anything, especially when you consider that both people making that claim have an a priori reason for assuming such a conspiracy exists.

 

[Split Rock]

Is that what you said to your priest years ago?

You really don't know what you are talking about...

 

[Split Rock]

Sorry, but you have given no evidence that scientists actually believe as Behe and Geisler contend they do.

Quoting two people as saying that academics and scientists fear losing their jobs is not evidence of anything, especially when you consider that both people making that claim have an a priori reason for assuming such a conspiracy exists.

Agreed. I have never seen this myself and I have been in academia since before 1990.

 

[digitalgoth]

Agreed. I have never seen this myself and I have been in academia since before 1990.

It's just more nonsense propaganda.

Since you clearly hire and tenure a professor who is vehemently opposed to the subjects they're being paid to teach and research.

 

[AV1611VET]

You really don't know what you are talking about...

I don't, huh?

What's this?

I never had my priest or nun tell me such a thing when I was learning Christianity.

 

[CabVet]

there is no possible way for the majority of scientists to reject evolution at this moment in time, I agree with dembski. For sake of losing ones job etc, it is possibly a phobia that many evolutionist deal with when attempting to take a minority view.

Oh, the conspiracy theory strikes again. I said this 100 times in this forum and will say it once again. If someone could convincingly reject the scientific theory of evolution, that person would probably get the Nobel Prize.

 

[Aureus]

Oh, the conspiracy theory strikes again. I said this 100 times in this forum and will say it once again. If someone could convincingly reject the scientific theory of evolution, that person would probably get the Nobel Prize.

Dude would get a Nobel Prize and wings named after him at every biology department from Stanford to Dartmouth to Oxford.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

...and in conclusion, if we all work together to line up dogmatists and radicals on both sides and shoot them behind the chemical shed, we can all have happier lives...but the news will have less things to report.

Reporting and teaching that evolution is a fact as well as a theory is not being dogmatic, it is merely expressing the truth.

For the same reason, we should give no credence to claims Atlantis was a real civilization, no credence to claims the earth is flat, no credence to the ideas of Immanuel Velikovsky, no credence to denials that cigarettes cause cancer, and no credence to denials that human generation of CO2 is causing global warming.

 

[sfs]

...and in conclusion, if we all work together to line up dogmatists and radicals on both sides and shoot them behind the chemical shed, we can all have happier lives...but the news will have less things to report.

That sounds radical and, well, a little dogmatic.

 

[createdtoworship]

Sadly, you are way out of touch on this issue. Firings by Christian colleges of teachers of science are all too common.

The Science-Religion Crisis at Christian Colleges[bless and do not curse]|[bless and do not curse]Kelly James Clark

Teaching Evolution at a Christian College » Dispatches from the Culture Wars

Professors Sue Christian College After Dismissal Follows Disagreement Over Literal Adam and Eve

you would have to prove that they were fired for evolution, which I presume is what the lawsuit is about, but I could be wrong. The one I read was about not believing in a literal adam and eve, not evolution exactly.