Posted on 09/20/2005 7:02:45 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
ITHACA, N.Y. - Lenore Durkee, a retired biology professor, was volunteering as a docent at the Museum of the Earth here when she was confronted by a group of seven or eight people, creationists eager to challenge the museum exhibitions on evolution.
They peppered Dr. Durkee with questions about everything from techniques for dating fossils to the second law of thermodynamics, their queries coming so thick and fast that she found it hard to reply.
After about 45 minutes, "I told them I needed to take a break," she recalled. "My mouth was dry."
That encounter and others like it provided the impetus for a training session here in August. Dr. Durkee and scores of other volunteers and staff members from the museum and elsewhere crowded into a meeting room to hear advice from the museum director, Warren D. Allmon, on ways to deal with visitors who reject settled precepts of science on religious grounds.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
If this is to be a beauty contest, then presumably it would be even more unfair (to the creationists) to bring Dawkins' wife into the discussion. I'll just go and dust off some of those old Dr Who episodes.
Tell the truth. Don't say things are proven facts when they are not. Just tell the truth.
That's it.
Let's parse this, shall we?
Okay. You've established the premise. How do you intend to test for God in such a way as to have the results reproduceable?
I was just pointing out what I thought their mindset was. I in no way advocated it - in fact I have been condemning it throughout this thread.
The sad part is that Christians do feel that serving a higher power does entitle them to divine protection. It can most often be seen outside of abortion clinics. It was also seen when Christians were sending their children in to get arrested during the Terri Shiavo ordeal.
Every scientific display I have ever seen in any museum anywhere refers to theories as historic fact. And that is fundamentally dishonest.
The museum is presenting its point of view.......it's opinion. It has the right to do so, as long as it is presented as such.
Only to you it is faith. To me it is truth.
As I said, I know I cannot prove it to you or anybody else in scientific terms, any more than I can prove love exists. But it is revealed to me with absolute certainty.
I can only suggest you try it for yourself, but for that matter I cannot convert you or anybody to Christianity. Nobody can convert anybody to christianity. If they say they do then it is not true Christianity, it is merely charlatanism or confidnece peddling.
There is no doubt that charsimatic people can give great motivational lectures and make large numbers of people feel good about themselves. There is no doubt people like that may use Christianity or the Bible as a tool for their sales.
But true Christianity is a deeply personal matter. It is strictly between you and Christ, nobody else. But should the power of the Holy Spirit enter your being then you too will know the truth of the matter, and be very Blessed. (but you must first accept it )
Wanna bet?
And again, belief in God is predicated on FAITH. Anyone who feels the need to masquerade their religious teachings as genuine science is a pitiable creature whose lack of faith is made obvious by their need to inject theology as the be-all, end-all of the discussion.
You would have to define "proven facts" somewhere along the line. It sure appears that you hold to a signficantly different definition than most, if you deny anything that happens without your personal (or some human agent to be named at a later date?!) observation to be factual.
At least he didn't say we were all mentally retarded this time.....
Agreed! Thanks.
One of my ongoing observations of evolutionists is that you have a great deal of faith. This is yet another example.
It's fine that you have faith in scientists. But it's faith, not fact.
Now I'm really late for what I'm supposed to be doing. Back later.........maybe.
OK, how about comments about the stars in a science museum. How do we know that they are not just lights in the sky a few billion miles away? No-one has been there to check. It's all just conjecture. Best put disclaimers over all the "inconceivably distant balls of gas" comments.
Pretty much all of scientific knowledge is inferred. No-one has ever seen an electron. No-one has travelled far out of the plane of the ecliptic to verify the apparent motion of the planets. etc etc etc.
The inferences and predictions in mainstream geology are at least as strong as any other scientific knowledge we have. Ask the oil companies. You don't find them employing the techniques of flood geology to find oil. (hint: that is because there aren't any)
The creationists say that the evolutionists do not bring forth supportable, meaningful scientific arguments.
I wasn't aware that not agreeing with the validity of an argument gave one carte blanche to be arrogant and rude. Apparently, you believe that it does.
Erosion can be tested, demonstrated, and observed. Even to you. It happens all around you, constantly, in a variety of ways and means. To deny the Grand Canyon formed by erosion isn't a matter of faith, but simple science and logic. You have to seriously fail to grasp one or the other concept to label it "faith."
Been there, done that.
But I was under the impression that I could read Genesis, and see a symbolic story written for uneducated people living in tents that roughly outlined what science believed about earth history and evolution.
But I was recently convinced that to accept Christ, I had to accept the apparent literal meaning of Genesis and other old testament books. That I can't do, because it becomes something closer to believing in Santa Claus than believing in truth.
So I've rejected God.
Although I still think that Christian philosophy and morals are a good model to live by. Which is why I hope that some smarter Christians come along and again teach what I was taught in the pre-Creation Scientist days, that there were no conflicts between the Bible and science.
I'm game. How would you use the Bible to test "God did it?" Would it be the same method by which I could use the LoTR to show that Gandalf really did battle the Balrog on the bridge in Moria?
Science doesn't. Keep the Bible in Bible class and science in science class.
Science doesn't. Keep the Bible in Bible class and science in science class.
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.