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 ...
Where did he say that? Is he prohibiting any scientific research?
“Evolution is the framework that makes it all make sense.”
I guess slapstick comedy is good sometimes.
Actually, it's simpler than that. They will do all that merely because he won't express his own personal opinion about creation. IT has nothing to do about what he really believes.
Now, this thread and the response by the evos so far, is a perfect example of why. NO dissent allowed.
If the poor guy even seemed to be close to admitting that there could be a possibility of a creator, no matter if he believes in old earth creation or not and whether he believes in evolution or not, the mere fact of his admitting a Creator is enough to have him lose his job.
The evos will ASSume a YEC, 6 day, 6,000 year old earth NO MATTER WHAT he says and cram him into the box, insist that what they say his beliefs are are true about him, no matter what he says, and will not be satisfied with anything less than his head on a silver platter. It will be social, political, and career suicide for him.
"Earth age" estimates are based on Uranium decay, not C-14.
Where was the ‘science’ mention? All i saw was the evolution comment which made religion the subject.
Then anybody that refuses to comment on evolution on "religious grounds" is qualified to be Science Minister.
And every scrap of it refutes the dream of evolution!
As light is compatible with darkness...
As cold is compatible with hot...
As near is compatible with distant...
As up is compatible with down.
Deception, and propaganda.
It was an irrelevent religion question. Evolution is pure religion, and had no relevence to his position, so his answer was the only correct answer possible.
The assertion was not just that the answer was correct, but that the answer was sufficient in and of itself to qualify him to be Science Minister.
Because he refused to allow religion to be confused with science. He adroitly informed the questioner that the question was inappropriate.
=[[Now, this thread and the response by the evos so far, is a perfect example of why. NO dissent allowed.]]
Yup- All we get is ‘there’s lots of evidence’- Yeah? Coulda fooled me.
[[It will be social, political, and career suicide for him.]]
He’s already done for- His opinions don’t jive with hte opinions of the masses so he’s a leper as far as they’re concerned. All they have to do is state “Ther’es mountains of evidence’ when all there is are ‘mountains of assumptions’ about the evidences. IF two species show homological similarities in say their femur- why hten they musta evovled one from another- despite hte billions of genetic differences and myriad morphological differences. ‘The fossil record is nearly complete’ is apparently what passes for scientific evidence these days
[[Which of your categories does carbon dating techniques fall under?”
Deception, and propaganda.]]
As well as more assumptions about past conditions which MUST conform to a priori speculations
And because he did that, he is qualified to be Science Minister. No other qualification is necessary beyond refusing to discuss evolution as science.
Considering evolution to be a religion is the only issue of consequence or worth consideration.
Nice strawman anyway, but I’m sure you can do better than that.
Actually, it’s more likely that his opinions DO jive with the masses. Just not the self-appointed elite.
You wrote:
"I’d say that the misister has proven his qualifications for the job with that statement."
The reasoning that lead up to that conclusion is apparent.
"Earth age" estimates are based on Uranium decay, not C-14.
In the old-earth model, yes. But my point was that C-14 is now well known to exist alongside C-12 even deep in the fossil record. Coal deposits and diamonds (which are composed of carbon) have been consistently 'dated' with C-14 dating techniques.
C-14 has a half-life of only ~5.7 KYA. At this rate after 10 half-lives (c. 57,000 years) less than 1/1000 of the original portion of C-14 would remain. After a million years a mass of C-14 the size of the earth would have completely decayed, not even a single atom of C-14 remaining. So the presence of C-14 in coal and diamonds conventionally thought to be hundreds of millions of years old is strong evidence they are not that old at all.
How does the young-earth model account for the evidence of age based on uranium decay? Do they simply ignore it?
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.