Posted on 03/18/2009 7:31:56 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
Canada's science minister, the man at the centre of the controversy over federal funding cuts to researchers, won't say if he believes in evolution.
“I'm not going to answer that question. I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate,” Gary Goodyear, the federal Minister of State for Science and Technology, said in an interview with The Globe and Mail.
A funding crunch, exacerbated by cuts in the January budget, has left many senior researchers across the county scrambling to find the money to continue their experiments.
Some have expressed concern that Mr. Goodyear, a chiropractor from Cambridge, Ont., is suspicious of science, perhaps because he is a creationist.
When asked about those rumours, Mr. Goodyear said such conversations are not worth having.
Brian Alters, founder and director of the Evolution Education Research Centre at McGill University in Montreal, was shocked by the minister's comments
“It is the same as asking the gentleman, ‘Do you believe the world is flat?' and he doesn't answer on religious grounds,” said Dr. Alters. “Or gravity, or plate tectonics, or that the Earth goes around the sun.”
(Excerpt) Read more at theglobeandmail.com ...
peeeng!
Some have expressed concern that Mr. Goodyear, a chiropractor from Cambridge, Ont., is suspicious of science, perhaps because he is a creationist.In this sentence she is using a tactic I call subrhetoric. It's extremely common.
Exactly. Said Minister should lose his job.
” I am a Christian, and I don’t think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate,””
Funny. Saul of Tarsus didn’t mind explaining his beliefs to anybody who would listen.
What’s ironic is that “evolution” is of such little importance to actual science. “Science” would proceed entirely apace, even were evolution to disappear as a philosophical concept completely.
This propaganda about "being opposed to science" is getting so old. Day after day there are threads right here on FR showing how science demonstrates evolutionary mechanisms are inadequate to explain most features of life. Yesterday's thread on folding of soft strata was a good case in point, as Darwinist after Darwinist avoided even attempting to refute this evidence for a young earth.
Sorry, but no. Goodyear should be graded on the merit of his actual job performance.
“The religious nuts...”
Oh, you must mean the young Earthers.
Yes. I call this way of talking subrhetoric. It is the daily bread of atheists and Darwinians.
Oh, you must mean the young Earthers
I became a Christian because I became convinced of a young earth. I became convinced of a young earth because of the scientific evidence and the fact that the creation model explained it far better than old-earth models. Cf. the book Pursuaded by the Evidence, ed. by Doug Sharp and Dr. Jerry Bergman.
Instead of attempting science apologetics, Darwinists today rely almost exclusively on government, media and academic control and philosophical/religious arguments. Just keep your eyes open and you will see it all around you. They've lost their case and it is apparent to all but themselves.
Evasion of a basic cornerstone of science = "F"
Thanks to ECO for finding this one!
Laugh of the day:
“basic cornerstone of science”
Sorry, but no. Goodyear should be graded on the merit of his actual job performance.
If the fundamental principle of modern biology is off limits for discussion by the Minister of Science how can he do his job? How about discussions of the expansion of the Universe (astronomy), the age of the earth (geology), the germ theory of disease (medicine) and other scientific matters? These are all religiously controversial as well. What isn't off limits?
True, it's only the basic cornerstone of biology. Doesn't have much to do with astronomy, I guess.
Looks like another example proving Ben Stein’s case. The “tolerant” totalitarians are at it again! Bob
Yep, no biological discoveries, no advances in biology, and no study of living organisms could ever occur without the “basic cornerstone” of assuming that man evolved from primordial goo.
I have a better question - Can you demonstrate any actual incompetence in the performance of his functions as “science minister”?
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.