Believing scripture but playing by science's rules

International Herald Tribune ^ | Feb 12, 2007 | Cornelia Dean

[lonestar67]

KINGSTON, Rhode Island : There is nothing much unusual about the 197-page dissertation Marcus R. Ross submitted in December to complete his doctoral degree in geosciences here at the University of Rhode Island.

His subject was the abundance and spread of mosasaurs, marine reptiles that, as he wrote, vanished at the end of the Cretaceous era about 65 million years ago. The work is "impeccable," said David E. Fastovsky, a paleontologist and professor of geosciences at the university who was Ross's dissertation adviser. "He was working within a strictly scientific framework, a conventional scientific framework."

But Ross is hardly a conventional paleontologist. He is a "young earth creationist" — he believes that the Bible is a literally true account of the creation of the universe, and that the earth is at most 10,000 years old.

[lonestar67]

very interesting article of how Christians are attaining advanced degrees which their secular colleagues resent and struggle over whether to allow

There is an interesting case of someone at Ohio State being stopped in the process of defending a dissertation on evolution education standards

[voltaires_zit]

There's nothing distinctly "secular" about disliking intellectual dishonesty.

[grey_whiskers]

If this is not on DC, then ...

*PING*!

Full Disclosure: Never heard of anyone in the article other than Stephen Jay Gould...

Cheers!

[lonestar67]

How were these individuals intellectually dishonest?

[taxesareforever]

Nothing came of it, Dini said in an interview, adding, "Scientists do not base their acceptance or rejection of theories on religion, and someone who does should not be able to become a scientist."

Not that I agree with Mr.Ross, which I don't, I must say that we now have in black and white an evo who advocates slamming the door of science on anyone who is a creationist. Only the elitist are allowed to fool with their religion of lies.

[WorkingClassFilth]

I know this young man's sister and have heard quite a bit of this story. His work, according to his peers, has no fault. The problem, for them, is his belief system.

[zylphed]

Are you a Christian? If so, think about an atheist who spent years to become a pastor, preaching that which he didn't believe, so that he would have the credentials when it came time for him to "deconvert" to atheism. Ask yourself why he was doing work to reconstruct Cretaceous phylogenies when he doesn't believe that there was a Cretaceous period.

[Getready]

Well, there you go...
If you don't philosophize like us "materialist scientists"
you cannot be scientific...I wish some of these materialists
would take one class in philosphy so they could understand
the weakness and strengths of their particular belief system.
Trying to solve the mind/body problem might be an eye opener.
Also, choice versus determinism might help them also.
"Personality" might get their minds out of their...well..you know/

I mean, if a creationist finds information, that works in
the "real" world (i.e. is verifiable in an empiric way),
why is that information wrong? What philosophical framework
has to be so controlling that it trumps empirical evidence?
It's almost the reverse of what was claimed to be going on
in the late 1890's...i.e. "supernaturalists trying to
defend their positions againts the naturalist empiricists"...
now the natural empiricists are going to be trying to fend
off the supernatural empiricists...
I say let the PhD guy get his Ph.D. if his science was
reproducible and verified. Let the Ph.D. discuss the
purely material "scientific" implication, and if that
is acceptable to the dissertation team, then so be it.
Great way to stifle knowledge Dr. Dini, you'll get
GREAT doctors who ALWAYS go by the book(sarcasm)....

[RegulatorCountry]

"Dini, of Texas Tech, agreed. Scientists "ought to make certain the people they are conferring advanced degrees on understand the philosophy of science and are indeed philosophers of science," he said. "That's what Ph.D. stands for."

On the contrary, Dr. Dini. Ph.D. stands for Philosophiae Doctor. Doctor of Philosophy. Far from having any sort of territorial claim upon the title, science is but one field of study offering a doctorate degree.

[voltaires_zit]

To put forward work that one believes to be untrue is the very pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty.

[RegulatorCountry]

"If so, think about an atheist who spent years to become a pastor, preaching that which he didn't believe, so that he would have the credentials when it came time for him to "deconvert" to atheism."

That describes a fair number of clergy in mainline Protestant churches, as well as Catholic clergy, although they seldom reveal themselves so blatantly. Do you really want to put forth this analogy, equating science with religion?

[Paved Paradise]

What a great comment.

[zylphed]

As an avowed secular humanist, I have no real problem with what he did beyond an avulsion for hypocrisy. If he did good science, irregardless of whether he believed in it, he should be rewarded with the appropriate credentials.

Many people work in jobs that they don't believe in at all. I worked at Target when I was much younger - and I absolutely detested that place. But the truth is, science is essentially an 'honor system' marketplace of ideas. We, as scientists, trust that people who work in science do so because they love the truth (we sure as hell don't do it for the money!). Which is why the few that decide that the truth is not so important can get away with up to 15 years of fraudulent research. But is this really how the creationists want to win? Taking advantage of a system that allows (probably too much) leeway by spouting "lies" for 5 years so that one can put the letters "PhD" behind one's name?

[zylphed]

In this instance, I have no problem with equating science with religion. But I really don't think that there are really all that many clergymen that literally go through years worth of theological training simply to embarass or bring their church into disrepute.

[RegulatorCountry]

"But I really don't think that there are really all that many clergymen that literally go through years worth of theological training simply to embarass or bring their church into disrepute."

You're misinterpreting the intent of infiltrating the church, zylphed. It's not simply to embarass or bring ill repute, it's to co-opt and use a trusted institution to further socialist and secular humanist ideologies. I'm surprised, personally, that it's taken so long for the shoe to be on the other foot, since the church has been under siege for four decades or more.

[zylphed]

It's not about staying within 'our' rules. A scientist that could prove that the world was 10,000 years old would go down in the ranks of Newton and Darwin. But proof is what's required. And I'm sorry, but using dates in your dissertation that are 6500 times older than you believe the universe to be is the purest form of intellectual dishonesty.