How can old-earth creationary theory be heard?
Jadon Slade Androsoff
old-earth creationary theory has been struggling to be heard. How can
old-earth creationary theory be heard?
*** Jadon ***
Andre
Jadon Slade Androsoff <ac...@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca> wrote in message
news:7vdv02$8vb$1...@missing.its.to...
Go the whole hog. Abandon the "creationary" bit.
Bob Mitchell
Jadon Slade Androsoff <ac...@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca> wrote in message
news:7vdv02$8vb$1...@missing.its.to...
> Young-earth creationary theory has dominated the creationary scene, while
> old-earth creationary theory has been struggling to be heard. How can
> old-earth creationary theory be heard?
>
> *** Jadon ***
It's usually the biggest weirdo who gets the most attention. Thus, the
Y.E.C. kooks steal the "Old-Earth" creationists' thunder. The following is a
copy of a message I posted to another newsgroup:
If you are tempted to believe the slippery "scientific creationists", your
only hope is to get to the nearest university or library as fast as you can!
Some people will never do this investigation or pursue educational remedies,
preferring to only look at material which supports rather than questions
their presumptions. As we know, this is the basis of "scientific
creationism"......that is, find pieces of data which appear to support the
Bible myth and throw everything else out (even the facts supporting major
theories being the basics of geology, physics, chemistry, biology and
astronomy). Small wonder the "scientific creationists" are always so
hyper-sensitive about being laughed at by the overwhelming majority of the
scientific community; they work so hard at attracting that kind of
attention, they surely must anticipate the ridicule.
Ridicule is a by-product of "scientific creationism" and in many cases,
those who vehemently support it seem to be wearing a sign that says "kick
me". We've all known "weird" kids in school while we were growing up. Some
of these kids would pretend to be peculiar in some way to attract attention
to themselves. I knew a kid who pretended to be unable to speak. You would
not believe the amount of attention this boy received by acting that way.
There was one kid with a glass eye who would get a lot of attention by
offering to pop it out and show you the raw eye socket. I have been amazed
at some of the jaw-dropping, astonishing claims by creationists which appear
to fit this "attention-getting" mentality. It's almost like a meeting of the
"Liar's Club", the members trying to trump each other with their wild
stories to gain admiration from each other.
The established and respected scientific community has recently closed ranks
to deal with the creationists. Arkansas 590, which was a kind of back-door
legislation to get "creation science" into the school curriculum, was
soundly defeated for what it was; an attempt to force a fundamentalist
religious view of creation into a public school system. That was a U.S.
Supreme Court decision, not my opinion, and you can look it up.
People get to believe whatever they want. That's what makes this country
great. But believing that aliens abducted Elvis is not necessarily
scientific, and no one in their right mind would want it taught as part of a
school curriculum outside of a sociological examination of the psychology
behind urban myths. "Scientific Creationism", while not simply a wacko Elvis
sighting, and certainly more complex and wide a phenomenon, is still closer
to an Elvis sighting than it is to real science. If anything about it is
allowed into school curriculum, it should be categorized with the study of
religions, the occult, psychology, or all three. Not science.
Education is the key to combat it. Diligence and hard work are required to
gain knowledge and understanding of chemistry, biology, etc., and not
everyone is up to the challenge. Ignorance is a fertile field in which
"scientific creationists" can sow the seeds of ludicrous pseudoscientific
beliefs. That's why there are books and websites for the layman. Here's a
place to start.
Also read "Tower of Babel" by Robert T. Pennock. In libraries now.
Also read "Why People Believe Weird Things" by Michael Shermer, also
available at your library.
Here are some other good web sites.
www.natcenscied.org/welcome.html (National Center for Science Education)
www.nas.edu (National Academy of
Sciences)
http://www4.nas.edu/opus/evolve.nsf?OpenDatabase (National Academy of
Sciences "Science
and Creationism" database)
If you can't afford the time or money to go to an accredited university, the
above sources are good basic information to get you started in the right
direction.
Notice I used the term "accredited universities". Yes, there are
"universities" run out of houses, storefronts and churches which claim to
bestow "degrees", of which most are unaccredited and unauthorized to do so.
Please check out the following before you readily accept any "scientist's"
claim to a "degree".
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html
http://www.skeptic.com/wieland-letter.html
http://earth.ics.uci.edu/faqs/paluxy/whatbau.html
The latter URL's exemplify one of the worst and slipperiest of the
"scientific creationists".
Education is key to the defeat of ignorance.
Bob Mitchell
Vish
Andre <and...@networx.net.au> wrote in message
news:381bc...@news.highway1.com.au...
>
> Jadon Slade Androsoff <ac...@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca> wrote in message
> news:7vdv02$8vb$1...@missing.its.to...
> > Young-earth creationary theory has dominated the creationary scene,
while
> > old-earth creationary theory has been struggling to be heard. How can
> > old-earth creationary theory be heard?
> >
> > *** Jadon ***
>
>
--
Vish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that
some supernatural agency-or, rather, Agency-must be involved. Is
it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled
upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it
God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for
our benefit? ~ George Greenstein , "The Symbiotic Universe."
(New York: William Morrow, 1988), p.27.
>
Andre
Vish <vi...@netzero.net> wrote in message news:UzIU3.6$qT2.231395@IConNet...
>
> Andre <and...@networx.net.au> wrote in message
> news:381bc...@news.highway1.com.au...
> >
> > Jadon Slade Androsoff <ac...@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca> wrote in message
> > news:7vdv02$8vb$1...@missing.its.to...
> > > Young-earth creationary theory has dominated the creationary scene,
> while
> > > old-earth creationary theory has been struggling to be heard. How can
> > > old-earth creationary theory be heard?
> > >
> > > *** Jadon ***
> >
> > Go the whole hog. Abandon the "creationary" bit.
> >
> Naa, I'd rather not blind myself to the facts.
There are obviously two sorts of facts: Those of the scientific community, and
yours.