Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why young-age creationism is good for science
Journal of Creation ^ | Brett W. Smith

Posted on 12/07/2009 7:30:12 PM PST by GodGunsGuts

The current treatment of young-age creationists in the scientific community and society at large is unfair and unwise. Scientists and philosophers of science, including old-age creationists and naturalists, should respect youngage creationists as legitimate contributors to science. Young-age creationists offer to the current origins science establishment a competing rational viewpoint that will augment fruitful scientific investigation through increased accountability for scientists, introduction of original hypotheses and general epistemic improvement...

(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Culture/Society; Germany; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: California; US: Florida; US: Georgia; US: New Jersey; US: Washington; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: absolutebs; antiscience; astronomy; atheistexcuse; baptist; belongsinreligion; bovinescat; catastrophism; catholic; christianright; churchofdarwin; climatechange; comedy; cosmology; creation; crevolist; darwin; darwinists; darwinliedpeopledied; dna; evangelical; evilution; evoisnotscience; evolution; evotardation; flood; genesis; genome; geology; godsgravesglyphs; information; intelligentdesign; judaism; lutheran; manmonkeymyth; medicine; medved; moralabsolutes; neodarwinism; noahsflood; notasciencetopic; propellerbeanie; protestant; rickydylan; science; secularhumanistfools; secularmythology; spammer; tedholden; tomzz; velikovsky; yac; yec
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last
For the record, this post is being posted in News/Activism by the express permission of Jim Robinson, founder and owner of Free Republic:

“Debate on church doctrine and or threads on specific religious matters may be best posted in the religion forum, but the defense of religious freedom, especially against those who wish to deprive us of same belongs front and center on FR....They banned God and prayer and creationism from public schools and public places, but I’ll be damned if they’re gonna ban Him or it from FR!”

—Jim Robinson

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2203455/posts?page=78#78

1 posted on 12/07/2009 7:30:13 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 12/07/2009 7:31:32 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Or to put it another way, in the marketplace of ideas, competition is a good thing, and unfair barriers to the same leads to poorer products for the consumer, and laziness amongst the monopolists. I see plenty of evidence for those phenomena.


3 posted on 12/07/2009 7:33:13 PM PST by Liberty1970 (Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

These threads deliver ^__^


4 posted on 12/07/2009 7:33:48 PM PST by happinesswithoutpeace (Good Lord deliver us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

IBTkeywordspammers


5 posted on 12/07/2009 7:35:34 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Are you sure? I immediately looked up at the keywords after your IBT and guess what I found???


6 posted on 12/07/2009 7:39:40 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Keep up the good work, GGG.


7 posted on 12/07/2009 7:40:46 PM PST by rae4palin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty1970

>>Or to put it another way, in the marketplace of ideas, competition is a good thing, and unfair barriers to the same leads to poorer products for the consumer, and laziness amongst the monopolists. I see plenty of evidence for those phenomena.<<

Creationism is NOT a “competing idea” any more than astrology is a “competing idea” to astronomy.

It meets exactly zero scientific criteria.

It may have some currency in a philosophical/theological arena, but that isn’t where the so-called “debate” is occurring.

Neither creationism nor ID are science. To suggest they are is to purposely misrepresent science and the scientific method.

This takes it our of the “arena of ideas” and into the “arena of fraud.”


8 posted on 12/07/2009 7:45:06 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

YEC.... oooooo boy... one of these threads.


9 posted on 12/07/2009 7:45:34 PM PST by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liberty1970

Precisely, if more debate was allowed to occur withing what should be the free market of scientific ideas, the origins/historical sciences would benefit just as much as as any other scientific enterprise...that is, so long as the debate is not declared “over” by those who have an agenda that has as its object something other than the truth!


10 posted on 12/07/2009 7:46:19 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

FWIIW, I have never (that I can recall) added any keywords to your threads and certainly haven’t done so in this one — you can check with mods.


11 posted on 12/07/2009 7:46:43 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bogey78O

oooooo boy... one of these looney psuedo-science groupies pushing evolution....


12 posted on 12/07/2009 7:48:36 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

>>that is, so long as the debate is not declared “over” by those who have an agenda that has as its object something other than the truth!<<

So you are cool with phrenology, astrology and alchemy participating in the “marketplace of scientific ideas,” right?


13 posted on 12/07/2009 7:49:24 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Thanks, that is about the nicest thing you have ever said to me, FD! No need to check with the mods, I will take your word for it :o)


14 posted on 12/07/2009 7:50:28 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“by those who have an agenda that has as its object something other than the truth!”

Its easier to use its screen handle: freedumb. :o)


15 posted on 12/07/2009 7:50:52 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

So this is a marketplace of ideas? Very well, then: if this is a marketplace, then I ain’t buyin’ this “young-age Earth” nonsense, which completely ignores what we know about radioactive age-dating.

There are limits to how idiotic people can be, and still expect to be accepted by serious researchers.

In this “marketplace of ideas,” I subscribe to the view that “young Earth” nuts should go jump in a lake.


16 posted on 12/07/2009 7:51:13 PM PST by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Wait... now this thread is about evolution?

So who has an agenda now?


17 posted on 12/07/2009 7:52:34 PM PST by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

>>oooooo boy... one of these looney psuedo-science groupies pushing evolution...<<

Quote the masochist, aren’t you? It is like “I DON’T UNDERSTAND SCIENCE SO I WILL KEEP EMPHASIZING THAT SO PEOPLE CAN PITY ME” in neon on your forehead.

If you have a SCIENTIFIC alternative to TToE that explains the BILLIONS of data, including MILLIONS of reproducible experiments and MILLIONS of observed examples — now is the time. Remember, if you can’t account for all of you have failed.

Meet the challenge or say goodnight Gracie.


18 posted on 12/07/2009 7:52:45 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
"So you are cool with evolution, phrenology, astrology and alchemy participating in the 'marketplace of scientific ideas,' right?"

Put them back in your toy box please!

19 posted on 12/07/2009 7:53:36 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

How long do you think they would last if they threw their hat in the ring of the science? I should think that neither creationists or evolutionists have anything to fear from any of the long-since discredited disciplines you mentioned above.


20 posted on 12/07/2009 7:54:44 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

You’ve OD’d again!


21 posted on 12/07/2009 7:54:45 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

>>Thanks, that is about the nicest thing you have ever said to me, FD! No need to check with the mods, I will take your word for it :o)<<

Did we have a moment there?

Seriously, I’ll try to be as good as I can, but I can only be as good I can be.

Keyword tagging (I didn’t even know about until I was accused the other day), is just spamming. People may get mad at me, but at least they know it was me what said what I said.


22 posted on 12/07/2009 7:55:04 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

>>You’ve OD’d again!<<

Just waiting for that alternate scientific explanation... any time now...


23 posted on 12/07/2009 7:55:57 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: docbnj

At your limited cognitive level, I guess that’s called debate.


24 posted on 12/07/2009 7:56:12 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

I’m sure. I checked immediately after I posted it and they weren’t there.


25 posted on 12/07/2009 7:56:14 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Good point. Maybe we’re totally wrong, and the earth only 5,000-10,000 years old. The scientific community needs to listen to everyone: scientologists (who believe we descended from clams), Native Americans who believe many animals came from people, Hindus who think Lord Vishnu, protected by a giant cobra, created the world, philosophers in Hyde Park, and guys that hang out under bridges.


26 posted on 12/07/2009 7:57:20 PM PST by ElectronVolt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: docbnj

Have you read the creationist critiques of the non-empirical, long-age assumptions that are built into evo radiometric dating methods?


27 posted on 12/07/2009 7:58:00 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

>>How long do you think they would last if they threw their hat in the ring of the science? I should think that neither creationists or evolutionists have anything to fear from any of the long-since discredited disciplines you mentioned above.<<

Those are analogies. Creationism meets the same number of scientific criteria as they do.

If you posit a scientific theory is wrong, you need a replacement that is 100% science and explains the extant data.


28 posted on 12/07/2009 7:58:53 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Neither creationism nor ID are science.

Depends on the methods/experients used in the process.

Scientific methods can be used to prove that a form of intelligence created computers (if anyone needed such proof). If scientific methods can also be used to prove that a form of intelligence created the cell let them proceed in the name of science.

29 posted on 12/07/2009 7:59:27 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ElectronVolt

The scientific community has no time for evolution, nor ‘debate’ that attempts to hang that nonsense on science like a tarbaby.


30 posted on 12/07/2009 8:00:00 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; GodGunsGuts
FWIIW, I have never (that I can recall) added any keywords to your threads and certainly haven’t done so in this one — you can check with mods.

I didn't see anyone mention your name. Why so defensive?

One could be led to think that you have a guilty conscience that way.

You know, the old *Throw a rock over the fence* and all.

31 posted on 12/07/2009 8:00:10 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
This takes it our of the “arena of ideas” and into the “arena of fraud.”

Next up, "Why the Luminiferous aether is good for Physics".
32 posted on 12/07/2009 8:00:36 PM PST by Phileleutherus Franciscus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Yes, I think we did have a moment there. Who knows where this might lead!


33 posted on 12/07/2009 8:00:37 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: docbnj
I can't resist...


34 posted on 12/07/2009 8:01:32 PM PST by ElectronVolt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

That’s just it, no historical science can be 100% empirical, because we can’t go back and repeat what we are studying.


35 posted on 12/07/2009 8:02:33 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“That’s just it, no historical science can be 100% empirical, because we can’t go back and repeat what we are studying.”

Exactly.


36 posted on 12/07/2009 8:04:08 PM PST by Freedom'sWorthIt (Obama's EPA - Climate Fraud + Obmacare ---- many will suffer and/or die unnecessarily.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
"If you posit a psuedo-scientific theory is wrong, you need a replacement that is 100% psuedo-science and equally fails to explain the extant flood/judgement strata we have in global abundance."

.

37 posted on 12/07/2009 8:05:09 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ElectronVolt

Sure, why not, if you need to go through all of those first, be my guest. Once you have eliminated them all, you will find that two remain standing, creation vs. evolution, and creation science is winning the debate over origins hands-down IMHO.


38 posted on 12/07/2009 8:05:26 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; GodGunsGuts
So you are cool with phrenology, astrology and alchemy participating in the “marketplace of scientific ideas,” right?

Yeah, well, don't forget that phrenology, along with alchemy, was the accpeted science of the day.

It's kind of interesting that all the things that evos like to saddle creationists with have very little connection with creationism historically and don't in the present (except in the minds of those who wish to discredit religious belief and have no other weapons which they can use), but rather with the accepted science of the day.

39 posted on 12/07/2009 8:05:50 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bogey78O

You’re welcome to join us. Do you have any thoughts on the subject?


40 posted on 12/07/2009 8:07:12 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ElectronVolt

Hey, is that any worse than claiming that we came from pond scum?


41 posted on 12/07/2009 8:07:13 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: what's up

>> Depends on the methods/experients used in the process.<<

You have experiments that test a creator? Wow — publish now and you will be rich beyond your dreams.

>>Scientific methods can be used to prove that a form of intelligence created computers (if anyone needed such proof). If scientific methods can also be used to prove that a form of intelligence created the cell let them proceed in the name of science.<<

AI can be interrogated (via source analysis, etc.) As of this moment, no creator has stepped forward (in Christianity nor AI) to allow one on one corporeal interrogation, nor said how He (or it) will ensure than the supernatural processes can be used and repeated.

Trust me, there is no ID nor creation rule that fits in science.


42 posted on 12/07/2009 8:09:00 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rae4palin

Thanks R4P, every little bit of encouragement counts, believe me! :o)


43 posted on 12/07/2009 8:09:08 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; what's up

Creationism is NOT a “competing idea” any more than astrology is a “competing idea” to astronomy.

It meets exactly zero scientific criteria.

It may have some currency in a philosophical/theological arena, but that isn’t where the so-called “debate” is occurring.

Neither creationism nor ID are science. To suggest they are is to purposely misrepresent science and the scientific method.

This takes it our of the “arena of ideas” and into the “arena of fraud.”

************************************************************
Spoken like a true accountant, or pencil pusher, or some other non-scientist.


44 posted on 12/07/2009 8:10:12 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: metmom

>> I didn’t see anyone mention your name. Why so defensive?

One could be led to think that you have a guilty conscience that way.

You know, the old *Throw a rock over the fence* and all.<<

No, I was accused of it the other night (once I parsed the accusation) and I was the first Scientist on the thread. More like preemptively defending against “guilt by association.”

:)


45 posted on 12/07/2009 8:12:09 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Liberty1970
Or to put it another way, in the marketplace of ideas, competition is a good thing, and unfair barriers to the same leads to poorer products for the consumer, and laziness amongst the monopolists. I see plenty of evidence for those phenomena.

So scientists should adopt Madison Avenue advertising tactics to get their theories accepted?

46 posted on 12/07/2009 8:12:32 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: metmom; freedumb2003

Good point, Metmom. Indeed, given the nature of the scientific method, one wonders why anyone would both to redicule past scientific beliefs as, at least in most cases, said scientific beliefs reflected the state of the art science at that time.


47 posted on 12/07/2009 8:12:41 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: metmom

>>Spoken like a true accountant, or pencil pusher, or some other non-scientist.<<

No, spoken like someone who understands science and the scientific method.

The fact you don’t like the proper and only logical conclusion of a thought doesn’t mean you can eliminate the analysis via ad hominem.


48 posted on 12/07/2009 8:13:46 PM PST by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Laughable that the dumb one associates astrology with astronomy! There is no historical reason to believe that such an association was ever even contemplated before the dumb one cooked it up in his head.


49 posted on 12/07/2009 8:14:24 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
They banned God and prayer and creationism from public schools and public places, but I’ll be damned if they’re gonna ban Him or it from FR!”

And the Hardcore Evolutionist on Free Republic and other liars applauded in support of the leftist revisionists who used illegal judicial activism to do their dirty work.

50 posted on 12/07/2009 8:15:08 PM PST by Old Landmarks (No fear of man, none!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson