Man of Science condemned for failing to drink the kool aid

Flatland · May 17, 2012

Jazer said:
No one is saying he does not know science. They are saying that he does not know evolutionary theory.

Actually people are saying he doesn't know science. He didn't even know that the Earth's distance from the Sun changes. This qualifies as "not knowing science."

Jazer said:
He is a neuroscientist.

In order to be a neuroscientist you have to have a PhD in neuroscience which this man does not have.

Jro · May 17, 2012

Flatland said:
In order to be a neuroscientist you have to have a PhD in neuroscience which this man does not have.

What if he had an MSc?

Notedstrangeperson · May 17, 2012

Selfinflikted said:
But because one knows about the brain and neuroscience does not mean that the person is a scientist.

NGC 6712 said:
Did you look into what that neuroscience training is? It is called BNT (basic neuroscience training) and is the only neuroscience they have to do - from what I can glean online it seems about A level standard. The same course is required of people getting into geriatrics for instance. This is not some PhD in science stuff.

What makes a scientist (depending on the field) is years of formal education, including all the requirements needed for higher learning, and a great deal of practical training - both of which neurosurgeons have.

The links I gave you say that a a budding neurosurgeon must first complete ST1-ST3 (Special Training) in neuroscience. In order to qualify for Special Training, they must first have a MBBS: Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (link). These two degrees are only given after completing medical school.

So to state the obvious, the neuroscience training needed to become a neurosurgeon is not "A-level standard".

---------------------------------------------------

Sorry I keep dragging this topic up, but these arguments really stink of desperation. Are we really so threaten by one creationist that we are willing to downgrade neurosurgery from a complex science to car repair with a scalpel?

Heck, I'll bet if a physicist suddenly declared he didn't believe in evolution we'd be flooded with users claiming physics isn't a real science

BobRyan · May 17, 2012

Flatland said:
Okay let's forget whether surgeons are scientists or not. That is completely besides the point. The fact is that this said surgeon is not qualified to teach science because he lacks the most basic understanding of science;

ok - we have heard from flatland.

Anyone else?

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan · May 17, 2012

Jazer said:
So does this mean that you just demonstrated that a man who is an expert in the field of neurology can be clueless about evolution? Remember he has more then 4 years of medical school. They have 7 years of on the job training in neurology called an internship. Would you trust him if you needed neurological surgery? A man who is the directory of his department of neurology. You do know that the director is the instructor that all the interns report to?

Yes but apparently some of our posters here are from countries where their neurosurgeons do not actually study science and know nothing at all about it - so for those posters they may not understand what you are saying in that post.

Not sure if flatland is in that group or not.

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan · May 17, 2012

verysincere said:
I think you will find that the reason many of us focused on his creationist (and anti-evolution) view here was because BobRyan used them as the basis of his complaint that Carson was an example of a brilliant scientist who refused "to drink the evolutionist Kool-aide."

But in the case of the Emory University protests (and the public letter of the faculty) it wasn't so much about his creationism and science blunders. It was about his frequent claims [which Carson now contests as being taken out of context] that atheists have no morals/ethics

That's the point where an actual quote from Carson would have been of interest to the truly objective unbiased reader.

Too bad you missed it.

That only leaves us with objective fact such as --

Award-Winning Neurosurgeon Condemned by Major University for Not Believing in Evolution - Godfather Politics

In 1987, with a 70-member surgical team, Carson was the first surgeon who successfully separated Siamese Twins conjoined at the back of the head. For this groundbreaking surgery and other accomplishments
...
In 2008, President George W. Bush awarded Dr. Carson with the Presidential Medal of Freedom award, the highest civilian award in the United States.

Stellar achievements by men of science are often recognized and so they become sought-after speakers at major universities.

Unless of course - such men fail to "drink the koolaid" when it comes to blind-faith evolutionism. The article points this problem out for all to see.

Turns out - Emory University has a focus on medical sciences.

I suppose for some not familiar with the concept, the only men of science that exist are rocket scientists. But in real life - that is not the case.

Very often - Medical science is advanced by those who practice it not just by those who conduct clinical trials.

I did not think this concept was going to be so difficult here.

And I am not the one arguing that he should have been a blind-faith evolutionists. That is coming from a few whiners at Emory not me.

in Christ,

Bob

Blackwater Babe · May 17, 2012

Jazer said:
You can be a car mechanic by the time you graduate from High School. To be a doctor you have to go to college, go to medical school, be a resident and then a intern. That adds up to 16 years MORE education then your car mechanic.

I remember once the TV broke and my dad wanted to watch a program on TV that night. So rather then just replace the tube himself he called someone to repair the TV. The guy replaced the burned out tube and gave my dad a bill for $10. My dad said: "WHAT, $10 just to replace a tube"? The repair man said: "You don't understand. I went to school for 9 months to learn how to do this." My dad said I went to school for 11 years and served in the Army to pay for it and I only charge $5 for a house call. The next day he want to the office and raised his rate to $10 for house calls. He never ever refused a house call. It is just people got away from asking him to come to their house and they did not think doctors did that anymore.

So the next time you need surgery, R U going to get your mechanic to do it? Good luck with that one.

Its great you respect learning and all, but seriously... I am a doctor, and I wouldn't call myself a scientist.

Blackwater Babe · May 17, 2012

BobRyan said:
Yes but apparently some of our posters here are from countries where their neurosurgeons do not actually study science and know nothing at all about it - so for those posters they may not understand what you are saying in that post.

Not sure if flatland is in that group or not.

in Christ,

Bob

I don't think there's any neuroscientist who doesn't study science, I thought the point of contention is whether or not he qualifies as a scientIST?

Anyway, for the sake of argument, lets say he is. So what? There's a tiny minority of doctors and scientists who believe some pretty zany stuff. Not really a great idea to go abandoning the scientific consensus on anything in particular because you've managed to find an outlier on the crazy curve.

I could introduce you to a handful of doctors and nurses who are extremely opposed to vaccination. I could introduce you to at least one dentist who claims flouride is bad for teeth. I can find you 1 demolitions expert who will claim the WTC was brought down with explosives. Not a great idea to change position on the general consensus because of these whackos though.

Flatland · May 17, 2012

Notedstrangeperson said:
Sorry I keep dragging this topic up, but these arguments really stink of desperation. Are we really so threaten by one creationist that we are willing to downgrade neurosurgery from a complex science to car repair with a scalpel?

Sorry but it is the creationists who are desperate since you guys have almost no actual scientists on your side. And since there is such a lacking number of creation scientists, the talking-snake cultists would do anything to try and convince us otherwise. This is exaclty why you so desperately want this surgeon to be a scientist when he is in fact not.

Notedstrangeperson said:
Heck, I'll bet if a physicist suddenly declared he didn't believe in evolution we'd be flooded with users claiming physics isn't a real science

So why hasn't that happened yet since there already is at least one physicist who don't believe in evolution?

On top of that I can show you plenty of sources that says physicist are scientists. CAN YOU SHOW ME A SINGLE SOURCE THAT SAYS SURGEON ARE SCIENTISTS?

If you so desperately want surgeons to be scientists then please go ahead and show us some proof.

Flatland · May 17, 2012

BobRyan said:
Yes but apparently some of our posters here are from countries where their neurosurgeons do not actually study science and know nothing at all about it - so for those posters they may not understand what you are saying in that post.

Not sure if flatland is in that group or not.

in Christ,

Bob

Can you please show me the poster who has said that neurosurgeons don't study science? I've looked through this entire thread and do not see it.

Notedstrangeperson · May 17, 2012

Flatland said:
Sorry but it is the creationists who are desperate since you guys have almost no actual scientists on your side. And since there is such lacking number of creation scientists, the talking-snake cultists would do anything to try and convince us otherwise. This is exaclty why you so desperately want this surgeon to be a scientist when he is in fact not.

I'm not a creationist, I'm a theistic evolutionist. It's rather sad when people seem to think that everyone who disagrees with their opinions on what is and isn't science must be some Bible-bashing fundie ...

Besides, as sfs and Blackwater Babe (and I) have already mentioned, if someone has a bizarre opinion, the fact that they are doctors or scientists does not automatically make their opinions right. That's the sensible thing to say. The silly thing to say is that if a neurosurgeon can be a creationist, then obviously neurosurgery must have nothing to do with science.

Flatland said:
On top of that I can show you plenty of sources that says physicist are scientists. CAN YOU SHOW ME A SINGLE SOURCE THAT SAYS SURGEON ARE SCIENTISTS?

Not all doctors are scientists (in fact most of them aren't), but Western medicine is based on science: creating a hypothesis, testing it, changing variables, gathering the evidence etc. That's why it's silly to say that Dr. Carson knows nothing about science. If he didn't, then he could not be a doctor.

USincognito · May 17, 2012

Flatland said:
Sorry but it is the creationists who are desperate since you guys have almost no actual scientists on your side. And since there is such a lacking number of creation scientists, the talking-snake cultists would do anything to try and convince us otherwise. This is exaclty why you so desperately want this surgeon to be a scientist when he is in fact not.

And you need to pay more attention to what people actually write rather than what you want to project on them.

Notedstrangeperson said:
I'm not a creationist, I'm a theistic evolutionist. It's rather sad when people seem to think that everyone who disagrees with their opinions on what is and isn't science must be some Bible-bashing fundie ...

Notedstrangeperson said:
Besides, as sfs and Blackwater Babe (and I) have already mentioned, if someone has a bizarre opinion, the fact that they are doctors or scientists does not automatically make their opinions right. That's the sensible thing to say. The silly thing to say is that if a neurosurgeon can be a creationist, then obviously neurosurgery must have nothing to do with science.

I really wish the "scientist/not a scientist" red herring hadn't been introduced at the very beginning of the thread. Dr. Carson is an accomplished neurosurgeon, but his scientific and medical background have nothing to do with his rejection of evolution - that would be his Seventh Day Adventist beliefs.

Some of the folks in this thread have crossed the line into field of study snobbery. I only have a BA in History and Political Science. Does anyone who has read my posts in Crevo think I don't know what the heck I'm talking about because I lack the proper credentials?

NGC 6712 · May 18, 2012

Notedstrangeperson said:
The links I gave you say that a a budding neurosurgeon must first complete ST1-ST3 (Special Training) in neuroscience. In order to qualify for Special Training, they must first have a MBBS: Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery

ST1 - ST3 is more than neuroscience. As the link states:

Trainees complete an initial training stage from ST1 to ST3 which includes one level of core neuroscience training at ST1 and two levels of initial neurosurgical training.

From reading the curriculum for that it seems low undergrad/A level standard science - i.e. you aren't a scientist by completing it.

Heck, I'll bet if a physicist suddenly declared he didn't believe in evolution we'd be flooded with users claiming physics isn't a real science

I am a physicist and I wouldn't claim such a thing - I'd claim the person was nutty perhaps though.

AnotherAtheist · May 18, 2012

Why is there still an argument as to whether or not surgeons should know enough to understand evolution. We've already had quotes posted by verysincere showing that Dr Carson himself doesn't understand evolution and a lot of other science, meaning that his personal understanding of science and evolution is not good enough for his pronouncements and beliefs to be of any note. Whether or not similarly educated surgeons should understand science to a good degree is then entirely irrelevant.

Lion Hearted Man · May 18, 2012

I don't get this whole "scientist/not scientist" argument that is going on. The practice of medicine itself is an applied science, but physicians at academic institutions also perform lots of research. A medical degree is not a PhD, but it does prepare one for both basic science and clinical research.

Dr. Benjamin Carson is a scientist, and a well-published one at that:
carson bs - PubMed - NCBI

Blackwater Babe · May 18, 2012

Lion Hearted Man said:
I don't get this whole "scientist/not scientist" argument that is going on. The practice of medicine itself is an applied science, but physicians at academic institutions also perform lots of research. A medical degree is not a PhD, but it does prepare one for both basic science and clinical research.

Dr. Benjamin Carson is a scientist, and a well-published one at that:
carson bs - PubMed - NCBI

The worlds best astronomer doesn't necessarily know anything about chemistry, though, if you take my meaning.

Lion Hearted Man · May 18, 2012

Blackwater Babe said:
The worlds best astronomer doesn't necessarily know anything about chemistry, though, if you take my meaning.

Excellent point, which was something I thought about adding to my post -- Dr. Carson is speaking outside of his field when he criticizes evolution. He is not a biologist. Though I would expect he should know better, every once in a while there is someone who is accomplished in one field who makes a fool of him or herself by attempting to comment on another field.

But to say that Dr. Carson is not a scientist because he is a neurosurgeon is quite absurd. Most people here must not know how academic medicine works. I've seen MDs take on PhD students for crying out loud.

AnotherAtheist · May 18, 2012

USincognito said:
I really wish the "scientist/not a scientist" red herring hadn't been introduced at the very beginning of the thread. Dr. Carson is an accomplished neurosurgeon, but his scientific and medical background have nothing to do with his rejection of evolution - that would be his Seventh Day Adventist beliefs.

Some of the folks in this thread have crossed the line into field of study snobbery. I only have a BA in History and Political Science. Does anyone who has read my posts in Crevo think I don't know what the heck I'm talking about because I lack the proper credentials?

And I think that quite a lot of very interesting scientific work is done in psychology. I don't read the original literature as that's not my job. But, I've read books such as Robert Cialdini's "Influence: The Science of Persuasion", and found it fascinating. And a lot of the experiments listed were very well designed and scientific. Richard Wiseman also does very good experiments in psychology, and has a very good understanding of the scientific method.

While I think that Bob Ryan's performance on some other threads has been very poor, not much better than putting his fingers in his ears and saying "na na nyaaaa I can't hear you", on this thread I think he has hit a home run. As he's successfully cast the argument as "if a surgeon generally should be able to make pronouncements on science then I win", and despite that being effectively demolished early on in the thread, many have continued arguing under Bob's rules. If I rated this thread as a debating exercise rather than looking behind the arguments, Bob has won.

selfinflikted · May 18, 2012

Notedstrangeperson said:
What makes a scientist (depending on the field) is years of formal education, including all the requirements needed for higher learning, and a great deal of practical training - both of which neurosurgeons have.

The links I gave you say that a a budding neurosurgeon must first complete ST1-ST3 (Special Training) in neuroscience. In order to qualify for Special Training, they must first have a MBBS: Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (link). These two degrees are only given after completing medical school.

So to state the obvious, the neuroscience training needed to become a neurosurgeon is not "A-level standard".

---------------------------------------------------

Sorry I keep dragging this topic up, but these arguments really stink of desperation. Are we really so threaten by one creationist that we are willing to downgrade neurosurgery from a complex science to car repair with a scalpel?

Heck, I'll bet if a physicist suddenly declared he didn't believe in evolution we'd be flooded with users claiming physics isn't a real science

I'll concede the point if it means we can drop it.

Split Rock · May 18, 2012

selfinflikted said:
I'll concede the point if it means we can drop it.

I think this whole thread should be dropped.

Man of Science condemned for failing to drink the kool aid

Junior Member

Jro

Guest

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

a post by Alan Smithee

Newbie

Gimmie dat ol' time physical evidence

Eternal Newbie

Well-Known Member

Eternal Newbie

Gimmie dat ol' time physical evidence

Under Deck

Conflation of Blathers

Similar threads