Replies

Missler is controversial, but far from a "total whack-job." I don't know much about Eastman except that he's a Christian and an MD; I attended a lecture given by him once that was quite reasonable and thought-provoking. He made the scientific case for creationism better than just about any I'd encountered before or since.

I don't usually recommend the book (Creator Beyond Space and Time), especially to those unable to make fine distinctions, because it does contain a section about so-called "codes" in the Bible (something I disagree with, however well-presented). However, the first section (from which my post was taken) was excellent: well-researched, footnoted, and written.

This was my own personal "book report" and not found on any website, so forgive me for the long post. I thought it addressed just about every point discussed in this original post, and then some. Which is not to say these well-reasoned and supportable arguments cannot be found on at least a few of the better creationist sites -- although the only creationist people I would recommend are those at the Creation Research Institute in Santee (or El Cajon?) CA, whose leadership includes many scientists.

One interesting thing I noted (besides the ad hominim attack, which always tells me that a point has hit home and that the attacker has nothing significant to add) was that you didn't come up with the one thing that my "book report" did not address -- whether the earth is an open or closed system. The book addressed that issue (making a great case for creation, of course), but that went beyond my purposes for doing the book report.

Pseudo-intellectualism does not impress me and I'm always amazed at the closed-mindedness of those who pride themselves on scientific open-mindedness! There were so many excellent points in favor of Intelligent Design contained in this section of the book -- I was also thrilled that creationism and science (as well as reason and logic) were not as far apart as some would have us believe.

3000: Yes, I liked that quote, too. I was really interested in the Biblical references to an expanding universe. Oddly enough, as I'm as far from the scientific type as one can get, it was the universal laws of thermodynamics that turned my mind toward a more honest and thorough investigation of Christianity. Go figure, but thanks be to God!

Pseudo-intellectualism does not impress me and I'm always amazed at the closed-mindedness of those who pride themselves on scientific open-mindedness! There were so many excellent points in favor of Intelligent Design contained in this section of the book -- I was also thrilled that creationism and science (as well as reason and logic) were not as far apart as some would have us believe.

When a science-oriented person says he's open-minded, he means he will consider your evidence and your logical arguments. If you have none to present, he will wait until you do. You may consider this as being "closed-minded," but it's very far from that. I'm open-minded, but I never forget that I have a mind, and I'm very fussy about what I'll let into it. No facts? No logic? Sorry, no sale.

As for these authors with whom you are so impressed, I'll just say that when someone from outside of the careful peer-reviewed scientific community comes along and claims that virtually everything we know is wrong ... well, all sorts of alarm bells go off. Can't help it. If your authors should turn out to be right, I'll hear about it soon enough. We all will.