DOCSLIB.ORG

HISTORY and ANALYSIS of the CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY by William E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
HISTORY and ANALYSIS of the CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY by William E AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF William E. Elliott for the degree ofMaster of Science in General Science presented on March 1, 1990. Title: History and Analysis of theCreation ltee Society Redacted for Privacy Abstractapproved: The resurgence of creationismthe past few years has been led by advocates of recent-creationism. These individuals, a minority among creationists in general, argue that the entire universe was created approximately 10,000 years ago in one six- day period of time.Recent-creationists support their position by appealing to the Genesis account of creation and scientific data. Their interpretation of Genesis is based on the doctrines of conservative, evangelical Christianity. Their interpretation of scientific data is informed by their theological presuppositions. The scientific side of recent-creationism is supported by several organizations, most of which had their origin in one group, the Creation Research Society. The CRS is a major factor in the rise of the modern creationist movement. Founded in 1963, this small (c. 2000 mem- bers) group claims to be a bona-fide scientific society engaged in valid scientific re- search conducted from a recent-creationist perspective. These claims are analyzed and evaluated. The Society's history is discussed, including antecedent creationist groups. Most of the group's founders were members of the American Scientific Affiliation, and their rejection of changes within the ASA was a significant motivating factor in founding the CRS. The organization, functioning, and finances of the Society are de- tailed with special emphasis on the group's struggles for independence and credibility. founding the CRS. The organization, functioning, and finances of the Society are de- tailed with special emphasis on the group's struggles for independence and credibility. The Creation Research Society's journal, the Creation Research Society Quar- terly, is analyzed with special emphasis on how its writers support recent-creation- ism from scientific data. The Society also publishes a number of creationistbooks, and these are discussed. Special attention was given to the group's most ambitious project, a high school biology textbook designed for use in public schools. Research efforts of the CRS are evaluated to determine if the Society does "do science." Some of their work has scientific value, but a significant portionof it is trivial in nature. In some cases the CRS does do science in that they seek to test hy- potheses from an honest evaluation of observational evidence. However, they operate independent of the traditional scientific community which ignores their efforts. HISTORY AND ANALYSIS OF THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY by William E. Elliott A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Completed March 1, 1990 Commencement June, 1990 APP VED: Redacted forPrivacy 71sorNof History of Science Redacted for Privacy Chairman of Department of General Science Redacted for Privacy Grade School'(I Date thesis is presented March 1, 1990 137Pedby William E. Elliott Acknkowle dgement The author expresses his deep appreciation to those who played a significant role in bringing this project to completion. Thank you, Jim Morris, for your diligent efforts as my major professor and editorial sounding-board. And to you, Paul Farber, for your input and encouragement. My thanks also goes to the staff of the General Science Department for their support and encouragement throughout this project. Other individuals provided essential support that was beyond the call of duty. Richard Muntz and Connie Edgar of the Western Baptist College library not only en- dured my many requests for strange and wonderful information, but they obtained everything I needed. Wayne Frair, President of the Creation Research Society, and other CRS members generously provided information from their personal files which provided unique, helpful insights into the workings of the CRS. A number of special friends provided needed personal encouragement throughout my work, but none so special and so important as that of my wife, Diane, and my sons, David and Michael. My thanks to all of you. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1 THE ORIGIN OF THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY 6 The Society's Theological Foundation 6 The Society's Theological Commitment 8 Antecedent Creationist Organizations 10 The Research Science Bureau 10 The Religion and Science Association 11 The Deluge Society 12 The American Scientific Affiliation 13 The ASA's Origin 13 The ASA and Inerrancy 17 The ASA and Evolution 19 The ASA and Creationism 20 The ASA and Recent-Creationism 23 Publication of The Genesis Flood 24 CHAPTER 2 ORGANIZATION OF THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY 30 Early Background 30 The Board of Directors 34 Offices 37 Membership 39 Operational Problems 47 Summary 60 CHAPTER 3 THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY QUARTERLY 62 Theological Context 65 Analysis of the Quarterly 69 Editorials 70 Regular Columns 74 Letters to the Editor 76 Papers 78 Biology Papers 82 Geology Papers 89 Physics Papers 96 Historical Studies 102 Education Papers 105 Research Papers 106 Book Reviews 107 The Writers 109 Summary 111 CHAPTER 4 CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY BOOKS 113 CRS Biology Text 114 Quarterly Anthologies 123 Monograph Series 124 Other Books 132 Book Sales 134 CHAPTER 5 RESEARCH IN THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY 136 Support of Research 138 Research Topics 139 Creation Research Society Laboratory and Experiment Stations 145 Summary 148 CHAPTER 6 AN EVALUATION OF THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY 150 The CRS as a Society 150 The CRS as a Scientific Society 150 The CRS as a Creationist Society 155 The CRS as a Religious Society 157 The Quarterly 158 Summary 161 BIBLIOGRAPHY 166 APPENDIX I CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY BOARD MEMBERS 192 APPENDIX II OFFICERS AND EDITORS OF THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY 196 APPENDIX III SCIENCE CITATIONS DATA 199 INDEX 202 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Membership Catagories 41 2. Voting Membership Ratios 42 HISTORY AND ANALYSIS OF THE CREATION RESEARCH SOCIETY Introduction The scientific part of the fundamentalist-modernist controversy seemingly ended in July, 1925, when Judge John T. Raulston gavelled the now-famous case of The State of Tennessee vs. John T. Scopes to a close. Creationism had won the battle, but it lost the war. Biology teacher Scopes was found guilty of teaching evolution, but the fundamentalist anti-evolution crusade had been made the laughing-stock of American intelligencia. Most of the scientific community turned their backs on Day- ton and creationism, convinced that defense attorney Clarence Darrow had shown that the concept of evolution was valid as a scientific and an intellectual concept. But the acceptance of evolution by the public was still not a foregone conclusion, for many still held to a Biblically-oriented creationism. In the last two decades history seemed to repeat itself as creationism re- emerged as a significant force in America. The increased activity of creationists and their successes in promoting their cause was obvious to all who read their daily pa- pers. Text-book controversies in California, trials in Arkansas and Louisiana, and the establishment of new institutions devoted to advancing the creationist cause demonstrate the vitality of the movement and the degree of popular support it en- joyed.' 'Edward Larson, Trial and Error: The American Controversy Over Creation and Evolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985) discusses the recent legal actions. Dorothy Nelkin, The Creation Controversy: Science or Scripture in the High Schools (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1982) deals with the recent text-book issues. The Institute for Creation Research in El Cajon, California and the Creation- Science Research Center in San Diego are the two most familiar of creationist insti- 2 Aggressiveness, sophistication, and diversity characterize this resurgent creationism while unity of organization and leadership are remarkably absent. Com- pared to the fundamentalist anti-evolution crusade of the 1920's with the charismatic William Jennings Bryan in the lead, the creationist movement seems too unorganized to accomplish anything. No single leader has emerged to give direction to the cause, nor have creationists agreed on their goals, or even accepted a single definition of cre- ationism. Yet there is enough coherence among creationists to identify creationism as a "movement" in sociological terms.2 The modern creationist movement, however, is not unified, for it has both a moderate and a conservative wing. Moderate creationism accepts God as the Creator, but takes no stand regarding the means and date of creation. Moderate creationists have no political agenda for introducing their view into public education, nor do they seek public confrontation with evolutionists. The conservative part of this move- ment consists of recent-creationists who base their position on a literal interpreta- tion of the Genesis account of creation. They argue that God created the universe in six 24-hour days approximately 10,000 years ago, then reworked the surface of the early earth with the world-wide Noahican Deluge. This group follows an agenda of con- frontation, debate, and legal action to include this variety of creationism in public education. tutes that have been founded in the last twenty years. In 1982 The New York Times re- ported the results of a survey which concluded that: "44 percent, nearly a quarter of whom were college graduates, said they accepted the statement that 'God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years.'" Only nine percent agreed with the statement, "Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this process." Richard Severo, "Poll Finds Americans Split on Creation Idea," The New York Times, Section B, p. 22, Au- gust 29, 1982. The recent rise of creationism is also documented by Conrad Hyers, "The Fall and Rise of Creationism," Christian Century 102 (April 24, 1985) 411-415.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lurking in the Shadows: Wide-Separation Gas Giants As Tracers of Planet Formation
    Lurking in the Shadows: Wide-Separation Gas Giants as Tracers of Planet Formation Thesis by Marta Levesque Bryan In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Pasadena, California 2018 Defended May 1, 2018 ii © 2018 Marta Levesque Bryan ORCID: [0000-0002-6076-5967] All rights reserved iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost I would like to thank Heather Knutson, who I had the great privilege of working with as my thesis advisor. Her encouragement, guidance, and perspective helped me navigate many a challenging problem, and my conversations with her were a consistent source of positivity and learning throughout my time at Caltech. I leave graduate school a better scientist and person for having her as a role model. Heather fostered a wonderfully positive and supportive environment for her students, giving us the space to explore and grow - I could not have asked for a better advisor or research experience. I would also like to thank Konstantin Batygin for enthusiastic and illuminating discussions that always left me more excited to explore the result at hand. Thank you as well to Dimitri Mawet for providing both expertise and contagious optimism for some of my latest direct imaging endeavors. Thank you to the rest of my thesis committee, namely Geoff Blake, Evan Kirby, and Chuck Steidel for their support, helpful conversations, and insightful questions. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to collaborate with Brendan Bowler. His talk at Caltech my second year of graduate school introduced me to an unexpected population of massive wide-separation planetary-mass companions, and lead to a long-running collaboration from which several of my thesis projects were born.
    [Show full text]
  • Li Abundances in F Stars: Planets, Rotation, and Galactic Evolution,
    A&A 576, A69 (2015) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201425433 & c ESO 2015 Astrophysics Li abundances in F stars: planets, rotation, and Galactic evolution, E. Delgado Mena1,2, S. Bertrán de Lis3,4, V. Zh. Adibekyan1,2,S.G.Sousa1,2,P.Figueira1,2, A. Mortier6, J. I. González Hernández3,4,M.Tsantaki1,2,3, G. Israelian3,4, and N. C. Santos1,2,5 1 Centro de Astrofisica, Universidade do Porto, Rua das Estrelas, 4150-762 Porto, Portugal e-mail: [email protected] 2 Instituto de Astrofísica e Ciências do Espaço, Universidade do Porto, CAUP, Rua das Estrelas, 4150-762 Porto, Portugal 3 Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias, C/via Lactea, s/n, 38200 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain 4 Departamento de Astrofísica, Universidad de La Laguna, 38205 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain 5 Departamento de Física e Astronomía, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, Portugal 6 SUPA, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews KY16 9SS, UK Received 28 November 2014 / Accepted 14 December 2014 ABSTRACT Aims. We aim, on the one hand, to study the possible differences of Li abundances between planet hosts and stars without detected planets at effective temperatures hotter than the Sun, and on the other hand, to explore the Li dip and the evolution of Li at high metallicities. Methods. We present lithium abundances for 353 main sequence stars with and without planets in the Teff range 5900–7200 K. We observed 265 stars of our sample with HARPS spectrograph during different planets search programs. We observed the remaining targets with a variety of high-resolution spectrographs.
    [Show full text]
  • Every Book in the Bible, Either Directly Or Indirectly, Tells You ___It Was
    Every book in the Bible, either directly or indirectly, tells you _________ it was written. Today’s text in Galatians does just that as we will see the very reason for the letter. It is important to note that within the ranks of Christianity these four verses are softened up in ______________ Bibles by mistranslations and rewording, or by simply avoiding these scriptures completely. It seems better in this lukewarm age to side- step this hard issue and let it go unchecked rather than hitting it head on and allowing its truth to convict hearts and transform lives. This morning as we are working through the passage remember your ____________ friends and family who may have been given a false hope in religion, and as a result, will face the consequences in the future. For certain, as the Bible states, there will come a time to answer for their rejection of the gospel and to face ____________________ from the Lord Jesus Christ himself. THE PEOPLE’S PROBLEM – GALATIANS 1:6-9 1. False gospel – Galatians 1:6-7a a. The exasperation – verse 6 - The churches’ desertion of God – verse 6a - The churches’ desertion of the ______________ of Christ – verse 6b b. The determination – verse 7a - There is _______ other gospel The plain and simple _________________ – 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures… He was buried… He rose again the third day according to the scriptures The response we must have when hearing the gospel – Romans 10:9-10, 13 Confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus…with the mouth confession is made unto salvation Believe in in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead…for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness Call upon the name of the Lord to be _______________ (talk to God in prayer and receive Christ as your personal sin-bearer, asking God to save you) Any other message is false and a clear departure from the plain and simple truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping the Creation-Evolution Debate in Public Life
    MAPPING THE CREATION-EVOLUTION DEBATE IN PUBLIC LIFE by ANDREW JUDSON HART (Under the Direction of Edward Panetta) ABSTRACT Evolution versus creation is a divisive issue as religion is pitted against science in public discourse. Despite mounting scientific evidence in favor of evolution and legal decisions against the teaching of creationism in public schools, the number of advocates who still argue for creationist teaching in the science curriculum of public schools remains quite large. Public debates have played a key role in the creationist movement, and this study examines public debates between creationists and evolutionists over thirty years to track trends and analyze differences in arguments and political style in an attempt to better understand why creationism remains salient with many in the American public. INDEX WORDS: Creation; Evolution; Public Debate; Argumentation; Political Style; Bill Nye MAPPING THE CREATION-EVOLUTION DEBATE IN PUBLIC LIFE by ANDREW JUDSON HART B.A., The University of Georgia, 2010 B.S.F.R., The University of Georgia, 2010 M.A.T., The University of Georgia, 2014 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS ATHENS, GEORGIA 2016 © 2016 Andrew Judson Hart All Rights Reserved MAPPING THE CREATION-EVOLUTION DEBATE IN PUBLIC LIFE by ANDREW JUDSON HART Major Professor: Edward Panetta Committee: Barbara Biesecker Thomas Lessl Electronic Version Approved: Suzanne Barbour Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2016 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without Dr. Ed Panetta pushing me down the path to study the creation-evolution debates and his work with me on this through the many drafts and edits.
    [Show full text]
  • Harold Camping 1 Harold Camping
    Harold Camping 1 Harold Camping Harold Camping Born July 19, 1921Boulder, Colorado, United States Occupation Talk radio personality, self-published Christian author, civil engineer Years active 1958–present Known for End times predictions Religion Christian [1] Spouse Shirley Camping (1943–present) Website [2] familyradio.com Harold Egbert Camping (born July 19, 1921) is an American Christian radio broadcaster.[3] He is president of Family Radio, a California-based radio station group that spans more than 150 markets in the United States. Camping is notable for applying numerology to his interpretations of Bible passages to predict dates for the End Times.[4] [5] His 2011 end times prediction was that on May 21, 2011 Jesus would return, the righteous would fly up to heaven, and that there would follow five months of fire, brimstone and plagues, with millions of people dying each day, culminating on Oct. 21, 2011 with the end of the world.[6] [7] He had previously predicted judgment days on May 21, 1988, and September 7, 1994.[8] [9] His 2011 prediction was widely reported, and prompted responses from both atheist and Christian organizations.[10] [11] After May 21 passed without the predicted incidents, Camping said he believed that a "spiritual" judgment had occurred on that date, and that the physical Rapture would occur on October 21, 2011, simultaneously with the destruction of the universe by God.[12] On June 9, 2011, Camping suffered a stroke and was hospitalized.[13] On June 23, Camping’s Family Radio station announced that it would replace his show, Open Forum, with new programming.[14] Biography Camping was born in Colorado and moved at an early age to California.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution Or Special Creation?
    EVOLUTION OR SPECIAL CREATION? By FRANK LEWIS MARSH, Ph. D In the great debate over the origin of this world and its inhabitants, both animal and human, many people overlook the subjective nature of the evidence used on both sides to defend positions taken. In this book the author points out that an examination of nature, either minute or vast, can never reveal, without outside information, just how the world came into existence. His sharp analysis of the problems involved will help clear the atmosphere for all who sincerely wish to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion. 1963 BY REVIEW AND HERALD REVIEW AND HERALD PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION WASHINGTON, D.C. www.AnswersInGenesis.org CONTENTS Kinds of Evidence What Do We Mean by Evolution and Special Creation? Has Natural Science Made Scripture Obsolete? Can Processes of Variation Produce New Basic Types? Completely Established Scientific Findings An Origin With Promise Creationist Internet Resources COPYRIGHT 1963 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION OFFSET IN U.S.A. KINDS OF EVIDENCE MANY honest-hearted men and women are asking the question Are we actually blood descendants of amoeba like, fishlike, reptile like, insect like, apelike types, or was our earliest ancestor formed directly from the dust, the son of God? Would Christ die to save noble beasts, or did He give His life to redeem fallen sons and daughters of Adam, children of God? This question naturally leads to another, How can we know the truth about this extremely important point? Is it a problem like that of the shape of our earth or its motions as an astronomical body? That is, Is it a problem that can be solved by applying the scientific method of investigation, where the worker employs his senses aided by specialized apparatus to secure data, and then searches for the correct answer through mathematical calculations from these data? If the problem of origin of living forms was of the same nature as that of the shape of our earth, careful scientists would have solved it long before this.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation and Evolution: What Should We Teach?
    Creation and Evolution: What Should We Teach? Author: Eugenie C. Scott, Director Affiliation: National Center for Science Education Bio: Dr. Eugenie C. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education, Inc., a not-for-profit membership organization of scientists, teachers, and others that works to improve the teaching of evolution and of science as a way of knowing. It opposes the teaching of “scientific” creationism and other religiously based views in science classes. A former college professor, Dr. Scott lectures widely and is called upon by the press and other media to explain science and evolution to the general public. Scott is the author of the 2004 book, Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction, and has served as president of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Scott has been honored by both scientists and educators by being awarded the National Science Board Public Service Award, the AIBS Outstanding Service Award, the Geological Society of America Public Service Award, and the California Science Teachers Association Distinguished Service Award. She holds a Ph.D. in physical anthropology from the University of Missouri, an honorary D.Sc. from McGill University, and an honorary Doctor of Science from Ohio State University. Abstract: In this essay, I sketch an overview of the foundations of the creation/evolution debate in the United States today. Evolution is rejected by many Americans because it conflicts with their religious views. This conflict may occur because evolution is not compatible with biblical literalism, or because evolution creates other problems in Christian theology. Most Americans do not belong to Christian traditions that require a literal interpretation of the Bible; in addition, there is a long tradition of accommodation of evolution and science to Christian theology.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University Law Review Volume 83 Issue 1 2005 Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution Matthew J. Brauer Princeton University Barbara Forrest Southeastern Louisiana University Steven G. Gey Florida State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Education Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, Religion Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Matthew J. Brauer, Barbara Forrest, and Steven G. Gey, Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution, 83 WASH. U. L. Q. 1 (2005). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol83/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Law Quarterly VOLUME 83 NUMBER 1 2005 IS IT SCIENCE YET?: INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONISM AND THE CONSTITUTION MATTHEW J. BRAUER BARBARA FORREST STEVEN G. GEY* TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Creation/Evolution
    Creation/Evolution Are the fossils in the wrong order for human evolution? Issue VIII CONTENTS Spring 1982 ARTICLES 1 Charles Darwin: A Centennial Tribute by H. lames Birx 11 Kelvin Was Not a Creationist by Stephen G Brush 14 Are There Human Fossils in the "Wrong Place" for Evolution by Ernest C. Conrad 23 Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating by Christopher Gregory Weber REPORTS .30 Creation-Evoiution Debates: Who's Winning Them Now? by Frederick Edwards 43 News Briefs LICENSED TO UNZ.ORG ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED FORTHCOMING PROGRAMS PBS TV Program, "Creation vs. Evolution: Battle in the Classroom," airing Wednesday, July 7, at 9:00 PM Eastern time. This sixty-minute documentary ex- plores the growing war of litigation over creationism in the public schools with interviews of teachers, scientists, religious, and political leaders, students, and parents in the forefront of the battle. The program particularly examines the "two-model" approach used recently in Livermore, California, and gets the reac- tions of the principal individuals involved. The basic ideas of creationism and evolution are argued in a "point-counterpoint" segment between Duane Gish and Russell Doolittle. The age of the earth and universe are covered. Other per- sonalities featured include: Tim LaHaye; James Robison; Richard Bliss; Nell, Kelly, and Casey Segraves; John N. Moore; Bill Keith; and even Ronald Reagan. A featured representative on the evolution side is William V. Mayer. The docu- mentary is a production of KPBS, San Diego. 1982 Annual Fellows' Meeting at Guilford College, August 8-13, Greensboro, North Carolina. Of the sixteen programs, one is entitled "Religion and Science: The Creationist Debate." Contact John O.
    [Show full text]
  • Russell Humphreys' Cosmology
    LETTERS TO THE EDITOR || JOURNAL OF CREATION 27(2) 2013 Baumgardner, except as an odd relic plants and animals reside that were later Do radioisotope of the creation process. buried and fossilized on the surface of the present-day continents? methods yield Don Stenberg To me problems of having the Santa Rosa, CA granitic rock comprising the bulk trustworthy UNITED STATES of AMERICA of today’s continental crust cool relative ages and crystallize during the Flood » John Baumgardner replies: are insurmountable. It seems much more reasonable to associate the for the earth’s Mr Stenberg seems not to grasp “dry land” of Genesis 1:9 with the the staggering consequences of his granitic continents and the onset of the rocks? proposal that the earth’s granitic Flood with the explosive appearance continental crust, with its large of fossils in the sediment record. John Baumgardner’s article on inventory of radioactive elements Mr Stenberg’s primary difficulty in radioisotope methods, in J. Creation and an average thickness of some being able to accept these conclusions 26(3):68–75), seems to be (in part) a 35–40 km, formed during the Flood. seems to be his reluctance to allow response to my article in the August Stenberg seems to imagine that the for God’s supernatural activity during issue, since some of the very arguments radioactive elements so abundant in creation and the Flood, despite the plain he uses in this paper regarding zircon today’s granitic rocks were somehow meaning of 2 Peter 3:3–6. crystals he also uses in his letter of introduced into pre-existing crystals response to my article in this same via some unspecified magmatic process John Baumgardner issue of the Journal.
    [Show full text]
  • D. Russell Humphreys' Cosmology and the 'Timothy Test': a Reply JONATHAN D
    D. Russell Humphreys' Cosmology and the 'Timothy Test': A Reply JONATHAN D. SARFATI Young-Earth creationists contend that a straightforward assert that it is impossible for dead men to rise. And the meaning of the Scripture supports a creation over six normal meaning of Jesus' death and resurrection is tied to the days about 6,000-10,000 years ago.1 They further contend historical accuracy of the event (the Fall) recorded in that 'if the plain sense makes sense, we should seek no Genesis (I Corinthians 15:21-22). other sense, lest it be nonsense'. Since Scripture is the Sola Scriptura is based on what Paul wrote in II Timothy Word of God, its teachings are correct, even if they disagree 3:15-17 with the opinions of fallible scientists, who are sinful like 15 'and how from infancy you have known the holy all humans (except the God-Man Jesus Christ, of course). Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for As Russell Humphreys puts it, in what he calls the salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 'Timothy test':- 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, 'To make these points [of a plain meaning of Scripture] rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, a little clearer, imagine a Jewish Christian of the first 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped century who understands Greek, Hebrew and the for every good work.' (NIV) Scriptures well. Let's call him "Timothy " since Paul's It should be noted that: protege was like that.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosopher Massimo Pigliucci the Graduate Center at the City University of New York, [email protected]
    Iowa State University Summer Symposium on 2012: Between Scientists & Citizens Science Communication Jan 1st, 12:00 AM Keynote Address—Nonsense on Stilts about Science: Field Adventures of a Scientist- Philosopher Massimo Pigliucci The Graduate Center at the City University of New York, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/sciencecommunication Part of the Other Rhetoric and Composition Commons, Rhetoric Commons, and the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Pigliucci, Massimo (2012). Keynote Address—Nonsense on Stilts about Science: Field Adventures of a Scientist- Philosopher. Jean Goodwin (Ed.), Between Scientists & Citizens. https://doi.org/10.31274/sciencecommunication-180809-112 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences and Symposia at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Iowa State University Summer Symposium on Science Communication by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Keynote Address Nonsense on Stilts about Science: Field Adventures of a Scientist- Philosopher MASSIMO PIGLIUCCI Philosophy Program, The Graduate Center at the City University of New York 365 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10036 USA [email protected] ABSTRACT: Public discussions of science are often marred by two pernicious phenomena: a widespread rejection of scientific findings (e.g., the reality of anthropogenic climate change, the conclusion that vaccines do not cause autism, or the validity of evolutionary theory), coupled with an equally common acceptance of pseudoscientific notions (e.g., homeopathy, psychic readings, telepathy, tall tales about alien abductions, and so forth).
    [Show full text]