- Nov 21, 2008
- 51,331
- 10,600
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Colin Patterson (Senior paleontologist at the British Natural History Museum and author of the Museum’s general text on evolution)
Some have noted that creationists like to quote Collin Patterson as being an evolutionist who admitted to certain flaws in the argument for evolutionism.
Can you see why that might be?
Please take a look at post #2 and answer the 3 questions or comment on why you think they would be difficult to answer... Just looking for conversation on those points.
====================================
Evolutionists often argue that they don't think creationists should be allowed to quote Patterson because no creationist has the ability to do it well enough that evolutionists would agree to it - can you see why that might be?
=====================================
Let's imagine for a moment that some place on the web you find that Patterson was a world famous evolutionist who lived and died as a diehard scientists promoting evolution... but you also found these verbatism quotes on the web.
first example:
Regarding: Collin Patterson (atheist and diehard evolutionist to the day he died in 1998) - Paleontologist British Museum of Natural history speaking at the American Museum of Natural History in 1981 - said:
Patterson - quotes Gillespie's arguing that Christians
"'...holding creationist ideas could plead ignorance of the means and affirm only the fact,'"
Patterson countered, "That seems to summarize the feeling I get in talking to evolutionists today. They plead ignorance of the means of transformation, but affirm only the fact (saying): 'Yes it has...we know it has taken place.'"
"...Now I think that many people in this room would acknowledge that during the last few years, if you had thought about it at all, you've experienced a shift from evolution as knowledge to evolution as faith. I know that's true of me, and I think it's true of a good many of you in here...
"...,Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge , apparent knowledge which is actually harmful to systematics..."
=======================================
IS there any reason/scenario/situation at all that you can think of where:
1. Creationists might be inclined to quote such an evolutionist as evidence that even evolutionists themselves have some concerns?
2. Evolutionists might not want to see those quotes especially if a creationist is quoting it?
For example: I can find places on the web where evolutionists publish those quotes and they don't seem to mind when they quote those statements because they always try to add some sort of "well it is not as bad as it looks at first" story to it.
Some have noted that creationists like to quote Collin Patterson as being an evolutionist who admitted to certain flaws in the argument for evolutionism.
Can you see why that might be?
Please take a look at post #2 and answer the 3 questions or comment on why you think they would be difficult to answer... Just looking for conversation on those points.
====================================
Evolutionists often argue that they don't think creationists should be allowed to quote Patterson because no creationist has the ability to do it well enough that evolutionists would agree to it - can you see why that might be?
=====================================
Let's imagine for a moment that some place on the web you find that Patterson was a world famous evolutionist who lived and died as a diehard scientists promoting evolution... but you also found these verbatism quotes on the web.
first example:
Regarding: Collin Patterson (atheist and diehard evolutionist to the day he died in 1998) - Paleontologist British Museum of Natural history speaking at the American Museum of Natural History in 1981 - said:
Patterson - quotes Gillespie's arguing that Christians
"'...holding creationist ideas could plead ignorance of the means and affirm only the fact,'"
Patterson countered, "That seems to summarize the feeling I get in talking to evolutionists today. They plead ignorance of the means of transformation, but affirm only the fact (saying): 'Yes it has...we know it has taken place.'"
"...Now I think that many people in this room would acknowledge that during the last few years, if you had thought about it at all, you've experienced a shift from evolution as knowledge to evolution as faith. I know that's true of me, and I think it's true of a good many of you in here...
"...,Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge , apparent knowledge which is actually harmful to systematics..."
=======================================
IS there any reason/scenario/situation at all that you can think of where:
1. Creationists might be inclined to quote such an evolutionist as evidence that even evolutionists themselves have some concerns?
2. Evolutionists might not want to see those quotes especially if a creationist is quoting it?
For example: I can find places on the web where evolutionists publish those quotes and they don't seem to mind when they quote those statements because they always try to add some sort of "well it is not as bad as it looks at first" story to it.
Last edited: