[Right Wing Professor]

How to deal with mobbing behavior by creationists. And a big bump for my University of Nebraska colleague Judy Diamond, who is helping train museum staff to deal with the behavior.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Oh the horror of it. You mean they were actually being asked questions and forced to defend their positions by visitors who were knowledgeable enough to ask? ROTFL! The sad part is that you are proud of characterizing this as mob behavior, or as some sort of problem.

[shuckmaster]

Agressive ignorance by the busload?

[Junior]

I notice that creationists consider it a win if they can flood you with so many questions you lose track of where you are. It's almost as if they are not really looking for information, but for reassurance for their ideas.

[1L]

>> After about 45 minutes, "I told them I needed to take a break"<<

After 5 minutes with me, he would have left.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Creationists used to do that back in the 1960s too.

[eleni121]

It's funny how "settled science" finds it disconcerting when it is challenged on its methodologies.

Some science. More like "my kind of science"

[MEGoody]

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.

I firmly believe that questions on the theory of evolution should be aired - but it should be done in a polite manner.

On the other hand, evolutionists are rarely polite to creationists, so whining about how they are being treated is sort of like little Jimmy whining to mom because his sister hit him back.

[Diplomat]

I must say, the evo's on this thread are sure making themselves look like reasonable, open-minded people they claim to be.

Sir, if you know this woman, why not call her and get some quotes about what actually happened and then you could present what really happened, i.e. her side of the story? I cannot ever trust the NYT to do such. They are totally agenda based.

For all to ponder:
It amazes me that on THIS site, a NEW YORK TIMES article is posted, and because it attacks Christians, the evos go crazy with their anti-Christian bigotry.

How can the NYT be considered a legitimate news source with all the fraud that has been uncovered? Should it not be obvious that the NYT hates Christians as much as they hate America.

Do you believe this poor woman was actually mobbed? Did she get assulted or rapped? Was she threatened? Did they call her bad names? What the heck happened? Is this a PUBLIC or PRIVATE museum? Are churches PUBLIC property or PRIVATE property? Did those pesky Christians have as much right as the next person to ask their questions when they visited this museum? I would think that most scientists would relish the opportunity to set these guys straight, but that is just me.

Some of you ought to be ashamed of yourselves for automatically assuming the worse of Christians, especially from such a disreputable news organization as the NYT. I know this doesn't include you Right Wing Professor, when I make this allegation.

[wolfcreek]

And on the eight day God said, Let there be open mindedness.

[Zeroisanumber]

All bask in the glory of His Noodly Appendage.

[jwalsh07]

Any particular reason anybody should take anything this particular twit writes seriously when she produces garbage like this:

“But how easy is it to advocate for science at a time when many Americans, including the president, do not accept evolution, the idea that human activity is altering the earth’s climate, or other ideas science regards as more or less established?” Cornelia Dean question to Dr. Hockfield, President of MIT.

[RightWinger]

If the creationists are correct, the evolutionists will have eternity to reflect upon their miscalculations.

If the evolutionists are correct, we will all just cease to exist when we die.

[bvw]

"settled precepts of science"

So too held the Church's Court that convicted Galileo -- he dared challenge the "settled precepts of science".

There is no observation with a point of view to make it, and without an observation the nigh-infinite set of quantum state possibilities never resolves to one. So without points of view, the universe stops -- or rather: does naught be.

Yet we know there is, there be and was. So by that we know there is a point of view to be had -- and further that there is and was in great, ornately intricate and majestic all at once order -- a order that gives a man each breath by beat of his heart and lungs drawing in the just-so-correct percentage of oxygen. A loving order by that, a creator who sets all points of view before the viewers, and by their breaths so given gives them the mind and arts by which they too can create new views, and even points of view that realize new worlds.

[Aquinasfan]

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.

Hehehe... Settled schmettled. We ain't buying what you're selling.

This sounds like fun.

[TAdams8591]

"It is no wonder that many biologists will simply refuse to debate creationists or I.D.ers," she said, using the abbreviation for intelligent design, a cousin of creationism. "It is as if they aren't listening."

There is truth to both theories in my humble opinion, and I do listen.

But it is shocking to me that people believe the earth is only six thousand or so years old.

[JasonSC]

The scientific ignorance continues...

[js1138]

Coming up on 1000. I've never started a 1000 post thread.

[Right Wing Professor]

M is a prime letter, er number, er...

Well, 1¹⁰⁰⁰ is prime, anyway!

[TaxRelief]

When talking to visitors about evolution, the pamphlet advises, "don't avoid using the word." Rehearse answers to frequently asked questions, because "you'll be more comfortable when you sound like you know what you're talking about."

And the brainwashing begins...