ICR Acts and Facts

[VirOptimus]

So much benightedness in so little space!

You are so wrong- you do not even know how wrong you are!

Maybe you should call teh Boston globe and tell them their interview with Kirschner in 2005 never really took place and their printing it in their newspaper is a lie!

Quotemining is akin to lying, and I note you conceded ”thousands of YEC biologists”.

 

[Ophiolite]

Well that is fine. As I have said- I am not a biologist and will butcher terms. but that doesn't make me wrong- just mistaking terms.

If you misuse a term it calls into serious question your understanding of the subject under discussion. I would never entertain the idea of challenging persons on a topic of which I had only a cursory understanding. To do so would be simultaneously discourteous and foolish.

If I felt, intuitively, that some of their concepts were possibly wrong I would educate myself in the field and rather than challenge them, would ask respectful questions. I would then either be convinced of their view, or be ready to attack their concepts with well founded points, backed up by evidence and properly structured argument.

Is it superfluous to say I see none of this from you?

You on the other hand knew full well I meant the cast- you just need to deflect from teh fact, that Lovejoy committed outright fraud by hacking off significant portions of the pelvic cast to make it look like his preconceived idea as to how it should! <cut>

I made no mention whatsoever of this. I corrected you on your misapplication of "sedimentary rock". The matter of the cast has been dealt with quite efficiently by others.

 

[Jimmy D]

then the aruments about being buried under tons of stone is laughable! You cannotshow me five examples of a section of bone staying articulated like this pelvic girdle was and yest flattened!

Bones do not flatten- they shatter under pressure! And these were fossilized! did those tons of stones also piece the pelvic fossil back together again so they could find it in one piece and not flat like a pancake?

There are many books and papers on the subject for pete’s sake. Seriously, it seems that you have absolutely zero knowledge on these topics apart from what you “learnt” watching a three minute video of a creationist mocking a TV program.


At least try googling these things before making such statements. Your comments are actually counterproductive to the creationist cause as, to be frank, you are really demonstrating a profound ignorance on topics you are attempting to criticise.


..........
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsos.160342

“By their very nature, fossils are usually incompletely preserved and deformed. Subject to millions of years of taphonomic and diagenetic processes, specimens often show the results of disarticulation, fragmentation, distortion and remineralization when they are discovered.”

Evaluation of a New Method of Fossil Retrodeformation by Algorithmic Symmetrization: Crania of Papionins (Primates, Cercopithecidae) as a Test Case


https://www.researchgate.net/public...tion_in_fossils_using_geometric_morphometrics

“Tectonic deformation is an important part of the taphonomic histories of many fossils. Although the effects of deformation, and methods to remove those effects, have been a subject of inquiry for over a century, systematic testing under known parameters has never been used to determine how the effects of deformation and the performance of retrodeformation techniques might vary. Comparative studies of morphology depend on the accurate estimation of variance-covariance structure, so an understanding of the effects of retrodeformation on covariance structure is important in assessing the utility of these methods.”

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ate_fossils_Application_of_the_Wellman_method


“Distortion of the vertebral column in fossils can be used for the estimation of two-dimensional finite strain by a simple geometrical technique, namely the Wellman method. We demonstrate application of the Wellman method to the distorted vertebral columns of a reptile and a stem-chordate, and use the results to restore the undistorted fossil shapes by a computer graphic method. The Wellman method is particularly efficient in situations where independent evidence for the principal strain directions, or undistorted forms, are lacking. The method is purely geometrical, easy to use, and rapid. It involves relatively low error, and works even when only a small segment of the distorted vertebral column is preserved.”

 

[Jimmy D]

Quotemining is akin to lying, and I note you conceded ”thousands of YEC biologists”.

There is no evidence that Kirschner said such a thing apart from a quote on creation.com.

Nothing.

I did discover that the article in question appears to be about a debate between Kirschner and Behe so it would have been interesting to see what was said. I doubt it was Kirchner on the ID side though!

 

[pitabread]

They also have had no effect on biology and its various fields as Dr. Mark Kirschner said in 2005.

That's false. Evolutionary theory certainly has had an effect on biology, as is evidence by its intersection with an number of biology-related fields. You can cling to this alleged Kirschner quote all you want, but it's not the reality of modern biology.

Even a cursory examination of modern biological literature (e.g. published scientific papers) demonstrates how evolutionary theory is integrated with modern biology.

That does not prove evolution true. It just shows that in their research they stumbled acrtoss a benefit.

The fact that applications exist based on the ToE certainly lends weight to its validity.

 

[pitabread]

They also have had no effect on biology and its various fields as Dr. Mark Kirschner said in 2005. And being dean of Harvard Genetics, I think he knows a little bit.

Just as an aside, I find it incredibly odd how creationists will appeal to scientific authority when they think they have a quote from a scientist refuting the validity of evolution. Yet at the same time completely ignoring the multitude of authorities that staunchly affirm the science of evolution.

For example, here is a quote from Dr. Francis Collins about evolution:

As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before. It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that. (emphasis added) 'God Is Not Threatened by Our Scientific Adventures'​

Given that Dr. Collins was former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, he probably knows a little bit too.

 

[lasthero]

At least try googling these things before making such statements. Your comments are actually counterproductive to the creationist cause as, to be frank, are really demonstrating a profound ignorance on topics you are attempting to criticise.

I get the impression some creationists - not all, but some - just have a script. It’s one they’ve cobbled together from different things they’ve watched and read. The problem is that they don’t really understand the points, so when they’re confronted with information that proves them wrong, all they can do is either repeat the same stuff or move on to another point.

It doesn’t matter what you respond to him with. He’s not really reading it, because he’s already made up his mind that his points are bulletproof.

 

[Astrophile]

Same wit genetics and molecular biology and so on. Dr. Kirchner of Harvard said for the past century all biology, physiology, molecular biology has advanced without regard to Evolution! He desires to see it regarded, but no outside of the evolutionary studies- you can be an expert molecular biologist and reject the TOE. there are many of those as well as biologists, physiologists, anthropologists etc.etc. etc.

As I already posted an article from Dr. Mark Kirschner that shows all the major advances in the bi logy fields have occurred in the last century without any regard to evolution- your point is just wrong!

Whatever Dr. Marc Kirschner thinks about the major advances in biological fields during the last century, he is not an anti-evolutionist or a young earth creationist. According to Marc Kirschner - Wikipedia , he 'is known for major discoveries in cell and developmental biology related to the dynamics and function of the cytoskeleton, the regulation of the cell cycle, and the process of signalling in embryos, as well as the evolution of the vertebrate body plan' (my emphasis).

You may also be interested in reading reference 21 of the Wikipedia article, Beyond Darwin: evolvability and the generation of novelty . In this article he 'gives his view of the evolution of evolvability and its profound importance for understanding and applying biology.' From this, he does not sound like a person who thinks that
'all the major advances in the biology fields have occurred in the last century without any regard to evolution'.

 

[nolidad]

Whatever Dr. Marc Kirschner thinks about the major advances in biological fields during the last century, he is not an anti-evolutionist or a young earth creationist. According to Marc Kirschner - Wikipedia , he 'is known for major discoveries in cell and developmental biology related to the dynamics and function of the cytoskeleton, the regulation of the cell cycle, and the process of signalling in embryos, as well as the evolution of the vertebrate body plan' (my emphasis).

You may also be interested in reading reference 21 of the Wikipedia article, Beyond Darwin: evolvability and the generation of novelty . In this article he 'gives his view of the evolution of evolvability and its profound importance for understanding and applying biology.' From this, he does not sound like a person who thinks that
'all the major advances in the biology fields have occurred in the last century without any regard to evolution'.

I said he was an evolutionist and I said he wished that the biological fields were more engaged than they had been for over a century!

He just rebuts the false hypothesis that TOE is essential to biological disciplines!

He is an honest evolutionist! You don't need to believe in the dogmas of evolution to be an expert in molecular biology, genetics, physiology, biology etc.. As shown by all the award winning (from the standard sources that are evolutionist believers) YEC scientists in many biological fields of research and study!

 

[nolidad]

Just as an aside, I find it incredibly odd how creationists will appeal to scientific authority when they think they have a quote from a scientist refuting the validity of evolution. Yet at the same time completely ignoring the multitude of authorities that staunchly affirm the science of evolution.

For example, here is a quote from Dr. Francis Collins about evolution:

As someone who's had the privilege of leading the human genome project, I've had the opportunity to study our own DNA instruction book at a level of detail that was never really possible before. It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming. I would not necessarily wish that to be so, as a Bible-believing Christian. But it is so. It does not serve faith well to try to deny that. (emphasis added) 'God Is Not Threatened by Our Scientific Adventures'
Given that Dr. Collins was former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, he probably knows a little bit too.

I know of many people who as Christians are either theistic evolutionist s or progressive creationists! matter of fact, there is bio-logos who fights hard against YEC science.

I suspect that it is a lifetime of indoctrination in evolutionary belief systems (many denominations in Christendom hold to theistic evolution) and training to think in terms of common ancestry and evolution that drives his presuppositional bias! What I love is the legions of scientists who were staunch evolutionists and who through their research in their respective fields became Christians and abandoned evolution as scientifically untenable!

why would they risk the scorn and rejection of the scientific community at large? Why would they risk their careers for many of them? Why would they reject all they were brought up on , indoctrinated in taught the methodology of how to look at evidence in light of an evolutionary presuppositon? That makes no sense.

 

[nolidad]

That's false. Evolutionary theory certainly has had an effect on biology, as is evidence by its intersection with an number of biology-related fields. You can cling to this alleged Kirschner quote all you want, but it's not the reality of modern biology.

Even a cursory examination of modern biological literature (e.g. published scientific papers) demonstrates how evolutionary theory is integrated with modern biology.

I di dnot say that evolutionary beliefs are not intertwined- I am just quoting Kirchner who is an ardent evolutionist, that the major advances occurred without thought to origins.

Once again one can be an expert geneticist or molecular biologist or physiologist or biologist and not believe in evolution! Maybe you should read all the papers that don't even mention evolution once! I haven't but I am sure Kirchner is not lying to the world!

The fact that applications exist based on the ToE certainly lends weight to its validity.

And Tang became a household drink because of research in the space program! Doesn't mean ET is true- but that in doing their research they find practical uses for things they discovered! Same with TOE doesn't make it any more true- just means in their research they found some practical applications.

 

[Speedwell]

I know of many people who as Christians are either theistic evolutionist s or progressive creationists! matter of fact, there is bio-logos who fights hard against YEC science.

I suspect that it is a lifetime of indoctrination in evolutionary belief systems (many denominations in Christendom hold to theistic evolution) and training to think in terms of common ancestry and evolution that drives his presuppositional bias! What I love is the legions of scientists who were staunch evolutionists and who through their research in their respective fields became Christians and abandoned evolution as scientifically untenable!

why would they risk the scorn and rejection of the scientific community at large? Why would they risk their careers for many of them? Why would they reject all they were brought up on , indoctrinated in taught the methodology of how to look at evidence in light of an evolutionary presuppositon? That makes no sense.

No, it makes no sense because it probably isn't happening. I doubt very much that there are "legions" of scientists converting to YECism.

You also seem convinced that "evolutionary presuppositions" are all that keep scientists or others from converting to YECism. That would certainly come as a surprise to the close to two billion Christians worldwide who would be unlikely to abandon Traditional Christianity for fundamentalist Evangelical Protestantism no matter what happened to the theory of evolution. For my part, I find a literal interpretation of Genesis to be shallow and theologically inadequate and would want no part of it whether there was a theory of evolution or not.

 

[Jimmy D]

I am sure Kirchner is not lying to the world!

But is creation.com lying?

Seems more likely.

Creation.com offer an unverifiable quote from Kirchner that completely goes against the grain of his published and verified words and everyone is supposed to believe it? Pull the other one.

Besides, it just be one man’s opinion, which wouldn’t exactly overturn the scientific consensus.

 

[VirOptimus]

- snip-

As shown by all the award winning (from the standard sources that are evolutionist believers) YEC scientists in many biological fields of research and study!

Awardwinning YEC scientists in biological fields?

It will be incredibly amusing seeing you trying to back up that assertion!

 

[Jimmy D]

just means in their research they found some practical applications

Like what specifically?

 

[Ophiolite]

He just rebuts the false hypothesis that TOE is essential to biological disciplines!

It certainly underpins biology. What one observes, or discovers in the field exists as it does because of evolution. That does not mean the relationship has to be explicitly noted in every instance.
I see strong parallels with geology: practically all geologists now accept the plate tectonic paradigm, but this does not mean every paper in the field refers to plate tectonics. Nevertheless, the data and hypotheses in such papers are implicitly dependent on plate tectonics.

 

[nolidad]

It certainly underpins biology. What one observes, or discovers in the field exists as it does because of evolution. That does not mean the relationship has to be explicitly noted in every instance.
I see strong parallels with geology: practically all geologists now accept the plate tectonic paradigm, but this does not mean every paper in the field refers to plate tectonics. Nevertheless, the data and hypotheses in such papers are implicitly dependent on plate tectonics.

So then you must be of the opinion that YEC PHD biologists and molecular biologists and physiologists, and biologists etc, are either not real scientists or inherent liars as others here have proclaimed?

And yours is a false analogy. One is based on empirical evidence and empirical data and observation. While evolutionism in the macro sense is based on inference and a prepositional bias.

Once again maybe you should go on a crusade to finish the purges and get all them pesky YEC teachers out of universities! And ask the various disciplines to ask for their awards back they gave to YEC scientists!

Evolution underpins evolutionary biology studies! But one can and have become expert biologists without believing in evolutionism.

 

[nolidad]

Like what specifically?

I don't know. I was simply agreeing with either ophiolite or brightmoon who said many ancillary discoveries have been made due to researching evolution.

 

[nolidad]

Awardwinning YEC scientists in biological fields?

It will be incredibly amusing seeing you trying to back up that assertion!

Well here is a list written by those hostile to YEC

Lists of creationist scientists - RationalWiki

Here is a list from Creation .com of those with just PHD's! You can click on names to find their bios!
Creation scientists - creation.com

 

[Astrophile]

I said he was an evolutionist and I said he wished that the biological fields were more engaged than they had been for over a century!

He just rebuts the false hypothesis that TOE is essential to biological disciplines!

He is an honest evolutionist! You don't need to believe in the dogmas of evolution to be an expert in molecular biology, genetics, physiology, biology etc.. As shown by all the award winning (from the standard sources that are evolutionist believers) YEC scientists in many biological fields of research and study!

The fact that one can be an expert in molecular biology, genetics, physiology, biology, etc., without knowing much about evolution doesn't mean that evolution is false. Astronomers were able to predict the movements of the planets before Newton explained gravitation, but that doesn't mean that the theory of gravitation is false.