They deserve to be debated and confronted but we don’t want to get in the game of censoring or rejecting them as non-scientists as long as their abstracts approach their topics in a scientific and professional manner. If we reject them beforehand, they can legitimately claim that they are being victimized and unfairly censored by conventional scientists who won’t give them a fair hearing.
once more the dishonesty of the YEC takes advantage of the openness and freedom of the scientific community to exploit it to their own ends, and abuse the privilege of open communication to push anti-scientific nonsense on the general population that doesn’t know the difference.
....Nothing in his 15-minute talk hinted at nonstandard geologic thinking.
....the first question following Ross’ talk challenged him on how he could “harmonize this work with [his] belief in a 6,000-year-old Earth.”
Ross answered the question by saying that for a scientific meeting such as GSA, he thought in a “framework” of standard science; ...
Ross pointed out that nothing in his presentation involved Young-Earth Creationism. But he then volunteered that he was indeed a Young-Earth Creationist.
DaRC wrote:I've just remembered where I'd read of this ability to think in 2 frameworks before...Orwell's 1984
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
DaRC wrote:Well if you follow Viktor Rydberg's reading of the Germanic/Norse creation myths. Loki gave people their looks, Odin gave them their mind and willpower whilst Hoenir gave them their soul which are the fruits of the World Tree. Hoenir is linked by Rydberg with the Stork or the Crane (via the epiphet long-legged) thus Hoenir delivers the child's Soul in the form of a Stork.
DJ Droood wrote:I think there is only one acceptable "textbook" and creation myth that they want to promote.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests