Henry Morris op-ed in US News & World Report
jspa...@linuxquestions.net
---------------------------------------------------------
Where Evolution Has Gaps, Creation Might Offer Answers—If We Will
Listen
By Henry Morris III
Posted February 2, 2009
Henry Morris III is CEO of the Institute for Creation Research in
Dallas and the son of ICR's founder.
During this last campaign, the topic of science—specifically,
creationism and evolution—was pushed out onto the stage of the
presidential debates. So much so that USA Today/Gallup released the
results of a poll in which 66 percent of Americans stated that they
believe in creationism. Not some hybrid theory mixing creationism and
evolution. Not intelligent design. But specifically that "God created
human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the
last 10,000 years." Which is pretty much how the book of Genesis
explains creation.
Last year, the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times conducted its own poll on
teaching creationism in the public schools. Not surprisingly, nearly
two thirds of registered voters were not convinced of evolution's
merits.
However, despite public opinion on the issue, creationism, in any
form, is not allowed in our classrooms.
Should it be? Americans seem to prefer it, or at a minimum favor a
critical discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of evolution. Even
the National Science Teachers Association—hardly a right-wing
fundamentalist group—insists that "teachers must be free to examine
controversial issues openly in the classroom . . . to maintain a
spirit of free inquiry, open-mindedness and impartiality in the
classroom."
So, what kind of science is being taught to our children today? A
philosophy of science, actually, rooted in a worldview that
deliberately disbelieves in anything supernatural. No God. No angels.
No Intelligent Designer. Everything happened quite by accident.
The idea of origins by accident (evolution), which Charles Darwin
popularized 150 years ago, is now characterized as a bona fide
scientific theory. Embarrassingly, this "theory" cannot be
scientifically observed in action today, nor can it be forensically
observed in nature's record of the past. But it is, nonetheless,
believed. And so ardent are its followers that many scientists refuse
to admit the weaknesses of this doctrine, let alone "allow a divine
foot in the door," as Harvard's Richard Lewontin warns.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2009/02/02/where-evolution-has-gaps-creation-might-offer-answers--if-we-will-listen.html
or http://tinyurl.com/db9h7b
J. Spaceman
jspa...@linuxquestions.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Over to your right, at the start of his U.S. News op-ed on
creationism, Henry Morris contends that 60 percent of Americans
believe in the Jewish and Christian myth of creation: that some 10,000
years ago, a Supreme Being created an Adam and Eve and so began the
human race.
He cites this statistic as a reason for including creationism, along
with Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, in public school biology
classes.
By doing so, of course, Morris exposes the silliness in his own
argument.
Humans believe in lots of stupid stuff. Ghosts. UFOs. Satan.
Collateralized Debt Obligations.
Our ancestors believed that the sun was a flying God named Apollo. The
Hopi, the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Mormons, and many other peoples
have composed elaborately varying songs of creation. It is our nature,
when looking out at the great twin expanses of space and eternity, to
come up with comforting myths.
The alternative—"They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams
an instant, then it's night once more"—makes for truly courageous
literature, but too many sleepless nights.
Here's a challenge for Mr. Morris, as we consider the seriousness of
popular opinion. Name one great movie star who hasn't played a
supernatural being, or otherwise starred in a science fiction or
fantasy flick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/john-farrell/2009/02/03/creationism-and-intelligent-design-should-be-kept-out-of-the-classroom.html
or http://tinyurl.com/b9v6cv
J. Spaceman
'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank
> John Aloysius Farrell offers this rebuttal:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Over to your right, at the start of his U.S. News op-ed on
> creationism, Henry Morris contends
Does anybody even listen to Henry Morris or ICR anymore . . . . .?
that 60 percent of Americans
> believe in the Jewish and Christian myth of creation: that some 10,000
> years ago, a Supreme Being created an Adam and Eve and so began the
> human race.
>
> He cites this statistic as a reason for including creationism, along
> with Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, in public school biology
> classes.
>
> By doing so, of course, Morris exposes the silliness in his own
> argument.
>
> Humans believe in lots of stupid stuff. Ghosts. UFOs. Satan.
> Collateralized Debt Obligations.
>
> Our ancestors believed that the sun was a flying God named Apollo. The
> Hopi, the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Mormons, and many other peoples
> have composed elaborately varying songs of creation. It is our nature,
> when looking out at the great twin expanses of space and eternity, to
> come up with comforting myths.
>
> The alternative—"They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams
> an instant, then it's night once more"—makes for truly courageous
> literature, but too many sleepless nights.
What I want on my tombstone:
"From nothing I come,
To nothing I return.
What is this light
Between darkness and darkness?"
================================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
http://www.RedandBlackPublishers.com
fc...@verizon.net
> On Feb 3, 3:04 pm, jspace...@linuxquestions.net wrote:
>
> > John Aloysius Farrell offers this rebuttal:
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Over to your right, at the start of his U.S. News op-ed on
> > creationism, Henry Morris contends
>
> Does anybody even listen to Henry Morris or ICR anymore . . . . .?
>
> that 60 percent of Americans
As you know, of that 60%, or the mostly overlapping ~70% that either
believes some creationist story or at least thinks that the
creationism-based "weaknesses" of evolution should be taught in
science class, few have heard of Morris, or AIG, RTB, DI, etc. But the
key misleading sound bites survive the "trickle down" intact.
>
>
>
>
>
> > believe in the Jewish and Christian myth of creation: that some 10,000
> > years ago, a Supreme Being created an Adam and Eve and so began the
> > human race.
>
> > He cites this statistic as a reason for including creationism, along
> > with Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, in public school biology
> > classes.
>
> > By doing so, of course, Morris exposes the silliness in his own
> > argument.
>
> > Humans believe in lots of stupid stuff. Ghosts. UFOs. Satan.
> > Collateralized Debt Obligations.
>
> > Our ancestors believed that the sun was a flying God named Apollo. The
> > Hopi, the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Mormons, and many other peoples
> > have composed elaborately varying songs of creation. It is our nature,
> > when looking out at the great twin expanses of space and eternity, to
> > come up with comforting myths.
>
> > The alternative—"They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams
> > an instant, then it's night once more"—makes for truly courageous
> > literature, but too many sleepless nights.
>
> What I want on my tombstone:
>
> "From nothing I come,
> To nothing I return.
> What is this light
> Between darkness and darkness?"
Don't you want to meet Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens and the Big
Bopper? ;-)
>
> ================================================
> Lenny Flank
> "There are no loose threads in the web of life"
>
> Editor, Red and Black Publishershttp://www.RedandBlackPublishers.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Desertphile
jspa...@linuxquestions.net wrote:
> Henry Morris III is CEO of the Institute for Creation Research in
> Dallas and the son of ICR's founder.
Morris Sr., of course, is in Hell right now. Job 13:2-14.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
Dave Fritzinger
them.
"Bye bye Miss American Pie
Drove my Chevy to the Levee but the levee was dry..."
Ron O
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:54:15 -0800 (PST),
>
> > Henry Morris III is CEO of the Institute for Creation Research in
> > Dallas and the son of ICR's founder.
>
> Morris Sr., of course, is in Hell right now. Job 13:2-14.
>
> Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
> "Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
I bet you wish that you had hit the delete key on this post.
Ron Okimoto
Steven J.
> Henry Morris the Younger has an op-ed in US Snooze & World Distort:
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Where Evolution Has Gaps, Creation Might Offer Answers—If We Will
> Listen
>
> By Henry Morris III
> Posted February 2, 2009
>
> Henry Morris III is CEO of the Institute for Creation Research in
> Dallas and the son of ICR's founder.
>
>
> However, despite public opinion on the issue, creationism, in any
> form, is not allowed in our classrooms.
>
determined by majority vote. I wonder if he would even endorse the
idea that falsehoods should be taught in schools if they are more
popular than truths. Yet the argument he's making depends on just
that idea (if he has some reason to suppose that creationism is
scientifically supportable, he should be stressing that, not poll
results).
>
> So, what kind of science is being taught to our children today? A
> philosophy of science, actually, rooted in a worldview that
> deliberately disbelieves in anything supernatural. No God. No angels.
> No Intelligent Designer. Everything happened quite by accident.
>
any day now his war against the science of meteorology, which attempts
to explain the weather without recourse to speculations about God's
will or references to the "windows of heaven."
>
Morris offers an interesting final paragraph:
>
"While state legislatures haggle over the words science, theory, and
weaknesses, American schoolchildren continue to rank poorly in science
education among the nations of the world. Pouring more money into the
status quo of evolution-based science education isn't the answer.
Teaching the truth is."
The interesting thing about that quote is, of course, that the nations
that score above the US in science are more committed to "evolution-
based science" than the US itself is. Granted that the article is
dishonest, it also seems to be just "phoned in," as though Morris was
barely trying anymore.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Read it athttp://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2009/02/02/where-evolution-has...
> orhttp://tinyurl.com/db9h7b
>
> J. Spaceman
-- Steven J.
Steven L.
> John Aloysius Farrell offers this rebuttal:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Over to your right, at the start of his U.S. News op-ed on
> creationism, Henry Morris contends that 60 percent of Americans
> believe in the Jewish and Christian myth of creation: that some 10,000
> years ago, a Supreme Being created an Adam and Eve and so began the
> human race.
>
> He cites this statistic as a reason for including creationism, along
> with Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, in public school biology
> classes.
>
> By doing so, of course, Morris exposes the silliness in his own
> argument.
>
> Humans believe in lots of stupid stuff. Ghosts. UFOs. Satan.
> Collateralized Debt Obligations.
That is technically true; but as an argument intended to sway the
readers of the magazine, it's ghastly.
Mr. Farrell's breezy implication is that the Bible is just as "stupid"
as UFOs or ghosts or Satanism.
Telling a largely Christian audience that their religious beliefs are no
better than Satanism is guaranteed to turn them off, right there.
Christianity has been fighting a battle against Satanism for centuries.
Advocates of evolution have to be *respectful* of other folks' deeply
held religious beliefs, rather than ridiculing them, laughing at them,
equating them to horrible strawmen like Satanism, etc. Otherwise they
will convince no one who isn't already convinced. And they will end up
adding to the perception that to really accept evolution, you have to
accept metaphysical naturalism. Which is what the Discovery Institute
has been claiming all along.
Attempting to shame someone into accepting your ideas will fail every time.
--
Steven L.
Email: sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
Steven L.
Evidently, current science education has done a terrible job of
explaining just what science is all about at its deepest levels.
Despite what Henry Morris III claims, I wish that science classes would
teach *more* about the philosophy of science that underlies science.
Typically they don't, just plunging the student into various scientific
facts and discoveries, with some discussion of the investigational
process.
That's exactly how it was when I went to elementary school circa 1960.
and I'm sad that there has been so little progress in science education.
The philosophy of science does not refute supernaturalism or imply
supernaturalism is false. It is just not part of science. That simple
truth has not been adequately explained to our kids--or their parents.
The problem isn't that science is attacking the supernatural. By
definition, it can't. It's the reverse--that some parts of some
religions have made claims about the *natural world* (usually on faith,
without evidence) that can now be tested scientifically. Those claims
may now be tested by science, and there's no way to wave our hands past
that potential conflict. That simple truth has also not been adequately
explained.
The claim by proponents of evolution that "Oh, there really is no
conflict between evolution and religion" is specious. It might be true
if religion had remained within the bounds of the supernatural and the
unknowable. But in a time before science, religions also attempted to
explain the natural world. And that's where religion and modern science
can come into conflict. And that's a real problem.