Creationist students confront Darwinism

[IDemo]

Creationist students take field trip to hotbed of evolution: The Smithsonian

By Steve Hendrix
updated 11:31 p.m. MT, Tues., March. 10, 2009

Every winter, David DeWitt takes his biology class to the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History, but for a purpose far different from that of other professors.

DeWitt brings his Advanced Creation Studies class (CRST 390, Origins) up from Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., hoping to strengthen his students' belief in a biblical view of natural history, even in the lion's den of evolution.

His yearly visit to the Smithsonian is part of a wider movement by creationists to confront Darwinism in some of its most redoubtable secular strongholds. As scientists celebrate the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth, his doubters are taking themselves on Genesis-based tours of natural history museums, aquariums, geologic sites and even dinosaur parks.

"There's nothing balanced here. It's completely, 100 percent evolution-based," said DeWitt, a professor of biology. "We come every year, because I don't hold anything back from the students."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29628516/

[tekisui]

1. .

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

What an idiot.

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. Everyone on the planet is in on the conspiracy to silence The Truth

Isn't that one of the strong signs of schizophrenic paranoia?

[n2doc]

5. The Truth is Out There!

They sound just like the birthers......

[msanthrope]

3. I am heartened that Creationist prof finds nothing to his liking

at the Smithsonian.....means my tax dollars are being spent well.

[Rabrrrrrr]

4. "There's nothing balanced here" - no shit, Sherlock. It's SCIENCE. Fucking jagoffs.

Assholes and their "Schools should teach BOTH sides of the issue!"

Fuckwits - there are no two "sides". There is one side - evolution. That's it. That's all there is.

[Vickers]

6. "Advanced Creation Studies"

I never even made it past Remedial Creation Studies.

:(

[BR_Parkway]

7. "Advanced Creation Studies" - how deep can you go over a 6 day

period?

I wonder how many students see that and think for themselves that maybe what they've been getting taught isn't accurate.

[gratuitous]

10. Cheat sheet for the final

"God did it."

See, every puzzling development, every piece that doesn't quite fit, every little bit of evidence is just God's way of trying to confound us (that God, what a prankster!), and the only proper response is greater faith and reliance on God.

It's all so simplistic. Or simple. One of those "simp" words, anyway.

[pnutbutr]

13. hopefully

they teach creation stories from numerous different cultures but somehow I doubt it considering the college he teaches at.

[Fleshdancer]

8. "in the lion's den of evolution"?? How brave they must be...to visit a museum.

I LOVE how they make going to Smithsonian out to be an act of religious bravery. It's like the leaving home to join the Crusades...except there's a gift shop involved.

:rofl:

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

9. And significantly less killing, one would hope.

:P

[Marrah_G]

11. If they choose to spend their money being taught that myths are facts then its their business

However- I would never hire one of these students for any job relating to science, technology or critical thinking.

[Solly Mack]

12. He thinks he's made a valid point. That's scary.

[RB TexLa]

14. Genesis-based, huh? First I think they need to understand the Bible, the people who wrote it

their understanding of science and the world around them. As well as the politics involved in how Genesis was written.

Of course there is this problem. When someone tells you they believe creation excatly as it is in the Bible, ask them "Which one of the creation stories do you believe?"

First God made all the other animals then he made man.

Book Of Genesis
Chapter 2
21 And God created the great whales, and every living and moving creature, which the waters brought forth, according to their kinds, and every winged fowl according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And he blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the waters of the sea: and let the birds be multiplied upon the earth. 23 And the evening and morning were the fifth day. 24 And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle, and every thing that creepeth on the earth after its kind. And God saw that it was good.

26 And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth. 27 And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.


Then God turned around and made man first and then the animals.

Book Of Genesis
Chapter 2
6 But a spring rose out of the earth, watering all the surface of the earth. 7 And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul. 8 And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein he placed man whom he had formed.

18 And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself. 19 And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: for whatsoever Adam called any living creature the same is its name.



http://www.drbo.org/book/01.htm

[elizfeelinggreat]

20. "I don't hold anything back from the students"

:rofl:

Don't confuse them with facts!

From an article quoted in another thread here this morning:

"The evangelical investment in moral, social, and political issues has depleted our resources and exposed our weaknesses. Being against gay marriage and being rhetorically pro-life will not make up for the fact that massive majorities of Evangelicals can't articulate the Gospel with any coherence. We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5229381"

[annabanana]

15. "Creationist students". . now THERE'S an oxymoron. . . n/t

[NeedleCast]

16. Faith Doesn't Give You The Answers

It just stops you from asking the questions. -Frater Ravus

[SemiCharmedQuark]

17. How do you get at doctorate in geosciences from University of Rhode Island while being a Young Earth

Creationist???

From the article:

"As a young-Earth creationist, he asserts that the vast majority of the rocks and fossils were formed during Noah's flood about 4,000 years ago. Most paleontologists date the T-Rex to 65 million years ago."

[Blue_Tires]

19. that was my question as well...

URI is a decent, legit school...

[SemiCharmedQuark]

22. Exactly. I can understand being a mathematician and not understanding evolution...

[BurtWorm]

23. Here's an interesting blog-post on the ethics of Ross writing a PhD thesis he didn't believe in

http://scienceblogs.com/ethicsandscience/2007/02/intellectual_honesty_in_scienc.php

If Ross wrote a dissertation that asserts something that he then disavowed elsewhere (and in such a short interval of time that clearly he must not have believed it when he asserted it in the dissertation or in his defense of it), that looks like lying. One might wonder how big a leap it is to go from, "These critters lived in these places until they went extinct about 65 million years ago (although actually they can't have lived that long ago since the Earth was created much more recently than that)" to "Here's the data from the isotope-dating of the fossils I found in these locations (although actually I didn't find any fossils so I just made the data up)." My suspicion is that Ross would not cross the line of actually making up data; what is the principled difference between crossing that line and making assertions that one does not believe?

One possibility is that Ross saw his dissertation as an exercise in presenting the inferences one could draw from the available data using the recognized methods of geoscience. In other words, here's what we would conclude if all the assumptions about the age of the earth, deposition of fossils, isotope dating methods, etc., were true. Given Ross's YEC, he presumably has reason to think at least some of these scientific assumptions are false. (They are religious reasons, not scientific reasons. If there were scientific reasons to doubt these assumptions, it seems like examining those could only lead to a stronger body of knowledge in geosciences, and that Ross could have made such an examination the focus of his doctoral research.)

Is it an obligation for a scientist who has concerns about the goodness of an assumption on which people in his field rest their inferences to voice that concern? Is it an obligation for that scientist to gather data to test that hypothesis, or to work out an alternative hypothesis that is better supported by the data? Or is it OK to keep your doubts to your self and just use the inferential machinery everyone else is using?

A shorter way of asking the same question: Does intellectual honesty in science just cover the way you use the inferential structure and the inputs (i.e., data) from which you draw your inferences? Or does it require disclosure of which assumptions you really accept when drawing your inferences and which you are inclined to think are mistaken?

Does intellectual honesty require that you disclose as well the fact that you don't actually accept this inferential structure as a good way to build knowledge?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

25. Thank you very much, BurtWorm!

I don't think it is right that he can hide behind credentials that he would not have received had he argued what he now defends.

[BurtWorm]

28. His motivation is clearly suspect, which makes his methodology suspect in my mind.

He clearly doesn't believe the fossils he discusses are millions of years old, yet he presents his case taking their reputed age to be a given. So what is he really talking about in his thesis? His advisers claim the science was impeccable or they wouldn't have awarded him the PhD. And they knew he didn't believe in the ages he was taking as given in the thesis. This is a screwy case.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

30. It's like someone getting a phd in history with a thesis on the horrors of the holocaust

and then advertising "Dr. So and So, PhD from RIU, says there was no holocaust".

RIU must be humiliated. The first thing that crossed my mind was "What kind of school is that?"

[BurtWorm]

34. They claim not to be.

Even though they were clearly used.

It is an interesting question, though. If the thesis is scientifically impeccable, on what basis could they deny the doctorate? It doesn't sound like the most ground-breaking thesis--something about the distribution of mososaurs at the end of the Cretaceous period. It sounds kind of pedestrian. But there's no law about PhD's having to be earth-shattering.

[rolltideroll]

26. That's it

I am calling shenanigans on this guy. Get your brooms people.

[tangent90]

18. Common ancestors with apes is a horrifying thought but they have no problem being descended

from dirt.


If those people had brains...

[BurtWorm]

21. "I don't hold anything back from my students" except that he's full of shit.

:eyes:

[rolltideroll]

24. Headline rewrite

Apprentice Shamans tour logic center, disdain human knowledge turn to Invisible Giant in sky

[NoodleyAppendage]

27. There's no debate between replicable science and made up bullshit! What a tragedy.

If I were in a hiring situation, I would trash can ANYONE who even took a class called "Advanced Creation Studies." That's like getting a class diploma in basket weaving from an online course.

I wonder what it takes to get a C-grade or below in "Advanced Creation Studies"?

[tjwash]

29. Failure to speak in tongues

[AllentownJake]

31. My best friend is a PHD graduate at John Hopkins in bioegineering

Every year they would get a large bound book with pictures trying to prove creationsim and than blaming every ill in the world on the theory of evolution.

Its quite a funny read.

[Occam Bandage]

32. "Darwinism" is not a word. nt

[BuyingThyme]

35. Huh?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

39. It's like saying "Intelligent Falling students encounter Newtonism."

Or students of humour-based medicine sickened by Leeuwenhoekism.

Flat earth scientists debate Magellanism.

[muriel_volestrangler]

41. There is a word 'Newtonianism', though

and 'Newtonian' can refer to a person:

Newtonian

B. n.

1. A follower or supporter of Newton; esp. a person who accepts the Newtonian or classical system of physics.
1741 tr. Marquis d'Argens Chinese Lett. xvii. 117 The Newtonian having said, That Descartes was an Ignoramus, the Disciple of that Philosopher reply'd in a Passion, You lie. 1806 Philos. Trans. (Royal Soc.) 96 13 Those, who are considered as Newtonians, conceive that the forces are in the simple ratio of the velocities. 1842 Southern Q. Rev. July 205 It might, perhaps, have been well if the Newtonians had..restricted their theories. 1893 Philos. Rev. 2 57 Though they were both ardent Newtonians, Lambert did not accept the law of gravitation as necessarily a metaphysical truth. 1937 H. WILLIAMS in J. Swift Poems 468 (note) Samuel Clarke, theologian, Newtonian, and metaphysician. He became rector of St. James's, Piccadilly, in 1709. 1993 Isis 84 337 Barrow came to be a pawn in a much larger game launched by the Newtonians.

Newtonianism, n.

The Newtonian system of physics; (in extended use) a philosophical approach based on that of Newton, or formed by analogy with his system of physics, typically emphasizing the role of laws and predictable order in the universe, and of experiment and observation in the discovery of truth. Also: the fact or quality of being Newtonian.
1814 T. JEFFERSON Let. 10 Feb. in Writings (1984) 1326 Christianity and Newtonianism being reason and verity itself, in the opinion of all but infidels and Cartesians, they are protected under the wings of the common law from the dominion of other sects. 1848 Princeton Rev. 20 567 Hegel was early instructed in Newtonianism, but his subsequent idealism made it impossible for him to explain the heavenly motions by the limitations of finite mechanics. 1890 Athenæum 19 July 92/2 declared Newtonianism to be the ‘most absurd scientific extravagance that has ever issued from the human imagination’. 1921 Philos. Rev. 30 383 Bentham introduced Newtonianism in morality; his followers..naturally modelled their social science upon the principles of their master. 1957 Midwest Jrnl. Polit. Sci. 1 253 Woodrow Wilson appears to have been the first to draw attention to the Newtonianism of the American Constitution. 1992 Isis 83 137/1 The primary topics are..the relationship between Newton and Halley, Halley's voyages to collect astronomical and geographical data, and, most of all, Comet Halley as a vector for Newtonianism.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

42. Well, I just coined the term "Magellanism."

Nevertheless, it's still as stupid as the word "Darwinism."

[BuyingThyme]

43. How 'bout "realism"? Is that a word?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

45. Sure.

And unlike "Darwinism," there are intelligent uses for the word.

[BuyingThyme]

47. Maybe they're synonyms.

[muriel_volestrangler]

40. First recorded use: 1856

No, really, it was first used about Charles Darwin's grandfather's ideas:

"1856 B. W. RICHARDSON Life T. Sopwith (1891) 256 Mr. Sopwith described the hypothesis of the development of living things from a primordial centre. That, said Reade, is rank Darwinism. It was the first time I had heard that word used..it had reference to Erasmus Darwin."

And in the more common usage:

"1864 T. H. HUXLEY in Nat. Hist. Rev. Oct. 567 What we may term the philosophical position of Darwinism."

[Occam Bandage]

46. I believe it is fairly used when referring to ideas that are purely Darwin's, especially

when contrasting Darwinian ideas to, say, Lamarckian ideas. However, it is not appropriately used as a synonym for "natural selection" in the United States.

[SidDithers]

33. How does anyone with a degree from Liberty University...

ever get a job in the real world?

Sid

[Bill McBlueState]

36. confront?

Usually to confront an idea means to present some new data or analysis that challenges existing thinking.

It doesn't usually mean to tour a museum and be offended by things.

[Dogtown]

37. Nicely articulated, BMBS

The headline is deliberately misleading.

[muriel_volestrangler]

38. '"A rat?" exclaimed Amanda Runions, ...

...a 21-year-old biochemistry major, when she saw the model of a morganucodon, a rodent-like ancient mammal that curators have dubbed Grandma Morgie. "All this hype for a rat? You're expecting, like, at least an ape."'

How the hell does a 21 year old, studying biochemistry, not already know what fossils show as the earliest mammals? I knew that when I was 5. Even if she's using her religion to deny the scientific evidence, she at least ought to know what the evidence is. What an ignorant moron. And no 'university' should have had to take biochemistry students to the Smithsonian to find that out.

[BlooInBloo]

44. "Darwinism". 'Nuff said.