My experience...Ken Ham and YEC.

[EternalDragon]

So what have you been going on about?

God's business.

 

[RickG]

God's business.

Shouldn't that type of discussion be in one of the religion forums of the CF rather than the science forums of the CF?

 

[TLK Valentine]

God's business.

You can't know God's business, so you can't make that statement.

 

[Split Rock]

God's business.

Is God busy doing something else?

 

[lasthero]

You can't know what I know, so you can't make that statement.

Actually, he kinda can. You've been wrong about numerous things involving science and biology in particular, so the evidence is quite strong that you don't don't know the first flipping thing about it.

Either that or you're pretending to be a moron.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Is God busy doing something else?

Reminds me of the old joke:

God is alive and well and working on a far less ambitious project.

 

[EternalDragon]

Shouldn't that type of discussion be in one of the religion forums of the CF rather than the science forums of the CF?

I was simply answering a question. I'm allowed to do that here, right?

 

[EternalDragon]

Actually, he kinda can. You've been wrong about numerous things involving science and biology in particular, so the evidence is quite strong that you don't don't know the first flipping thing about it.

Either that or you're pretending to be a moron.

So you making accusations towards me makes scientific assumptions correct?

 

[CabVet]

So you making accusations towards me makes scientific assumptions correct?

No, it just makes whatever you say about science incorrect.

 

[lasthero]

So you making accusations towards me makes scientific assumptions correct?

Not accusing you of anything. You have wrong about science and biology in particular. Right of the top of my head, the time when you tried to make a nested hierarchy with boats and cars and showed you didn't even know what a nested hierarchy really is, that comes to mind.

Now that i have your attention, though, will you stop ignoring me and answer the question from earlier? The impact craters all over this planet, did God make those, too?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Science or the knowledge about the world and the past agrees with the biblical account. However, the majority of scientists make naturalistic assumptions about the world and the past. Which has more to do with preserving their careers than with the truth.

What? No. I work in science. Research careers aren't threatened by research, but by funding cuts and the degradation of the science curriculum at the behest of creationist politicians.

 

[mark kennedy]

What? No. I work in science. Research careers aren't threatened by research, but by funding cuts and the degradation of the science curriculum at the behest of creationist politicians.

Nonsense

 

[TLK Valentine]

Nonsense

Spoken by someone who's in the profession, no doubt?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Nonsense

My research is in the epilepsy field. What could potentially threaten my embryonic career in this field? Imagine that a large proportion of the public believed that epilepsy was caused by demonic spirits, and that the most preferable treatment for this condition was not medication or surgery but the incantation of a witch doctor. Imagine further that these people organised themselves into well-financed groups whose members succeeded in occupying strategic positions at all levels of government. From there, they exert their influence on research funding, ensuring that no grant proposal of mine ever receives funding. They have members on ethics boards, ensuring that all my proposed studies fail to pass ethical review for spurious reasons. Their toxic influence pervades the science curriculum too, where they push their antiquated and erroneous views into classrooms all around the country, giving them the opportunity to malign legitimate research wherever their textbooks are read. It is this sort of situation that threatens the careers of scientists everywhere.

 

[RickG]

Nonsense

Nonsense on what basis, personal uninformed opinion, or personal experience in performing professional scientific research? Please elaborate.

 

[ChetSinger]

My research is in the epilepsy field. What could potentially threaten my embryonic career in this field? Imagine that a large proportion of the public believed that epilepsy was caused by demonic spirits, and that the most preferable treatment for this condition was not medication or surgery but the incantation of a witch doctor. Imagine further that these people organised themselves into well-financed groups whose members succeeded in occupying strategic positions at all levels of government. From there, they exert their influence on research funding, ensuring that no grant proposal of mine ever receives funding. They have members on ethics boards, ensuring that all my proposed studies fail to pass ethical review for spurious reasons. Their toxic influence pervades the science curriculum too, where they push their antiquated and erroneous views into classrooms all around the country, giving them the opportunity to malign legitimate research wherever their textbooks are read. It is this sort of situation that threatens the careers of scientists everywhere.

It sounds to me like if Haitian voodoo believers and witch doctors ever organise themselves into well-financed groups whose members succeed in occupying strategic positions at all levels of government, your field may have a problem. But as a Christian, I'll stand with you.

 

[hedrick]

Anyway, I feel a sort of moral obligation to go. The moral obligation is to ask some questions (hopefully there will be a sort of question time) about the age of the earth, evolution, etc., but fit into there that there IS a middle ground between fundamentalism and reason. I need these people, who come from a similar background as I do (namely fundamentalism), to understand that it's not so black and white (i.e., the Bible is perfect and good, science is evil). Especially the little kids! I really feel a moral outrage that they are being fed this stuff.

I support your intent. But there are some things to think about in advance.

1. These guys use fallacies from many disciplines. To do a good job, you unfortunately need to spend a lot of time preparing; reading debates to see what they typically say, and understanding pretty much every aspect that could be brought up. Otherwise you're likely to get snowed by BS, but BS that you can't show is BS at the time.

2. Your friends are going to think you're an atheist. As you know from your own background, in churches like yours people identify acceptance of evolution with liberalism, and liberalism with atheism. This mindset is really hard to break. It's much easier to get a conservative Christian to become a non-Christian than a Christian who accepts consensus science and scholarship.

In some sense there's a good reason for this. Ideas are connected. Once you start looking at evidence you'll find the same issues with Noah. You'll find that archaeologists don't think the Exodus could have happened, and even the accounts of the kings are, shall we say, oversimplified. Where is original sin if there's no actual fall of Adam? There are answers, but the result will look very different from conservative Christianity. It won't be the same faith you're used to with a few tweaks to agree with science.

Of course compromises are possible. You can accept evolution and an old universe, but reject archaeology, and continue to read the Bible through conservative tradition rather than as it actually is. But from some of what you say, it doesn't seem likely that you'll find that satisfying.

 

[Oncedeceived]

My research is in the epilepsy field. What could potentially threaten my embryonic career in this field? Imagine that a large proportion of the public believed that epilepsy was caused by demonic spirits, and that the most preferable treatment for this condition was not medication or surgery but the incantation of a witch doctor. Imagine further that these people organised themselves into well-financed groups whose members succeeded in occupying strategic positions at all levels of government. From there, they exert their influence on research funding, ensuring that no grant proposal of mine ever receives funding. They have members on ethics boards, ensuring that all my proposed studies fail to pass ethical review for spurious reasons. Their toxic influence pervades the science curriculum too, where they push their antiquated and erroneous views into classrooms all around the country, giving them the opportunity to malign legitimate research wherever their textbooks are read. It is this sort of situation that threatens the careers of scientists everywhere.

Who in the world are you referring to?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Who in the world are you referring to?

The parallel is Creationism and climate change denialism, in case it wasn't already clear.

 

[Oncedeceived]

The parallel is Creationism and climate change denialism, in case it wasn't already clear.

How does Creationism (whatever that is) and those who deny climate change parallel those imaginary people in your scenario?