Jump to content


Photo

Who Are The Creationist Scientists?


  • Please log in to reply
89 replies to this topic

#81 lehtv

lehtv

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Age: 20
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Edinburgh

Posted 25 November 2009 - 12:28 PM

I read some of the recent posts in this thread, including the totally massive list of creationist scientists by Ron. Most interesting. But I'd still like to know who the creation scientists are. I'm referring to people who specialise in creation science, not people of other disciplines who hold creationist beliefs. It's a bit like the difference between a physicist who hold evolutionist views and an evolutionary biologist.

#82 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 25 November 2009 - 02:41 PM

I read some of the recent posts in this thread, including the totally massive list of creationist scientists by Ron. Most interesting. But I'd still like to know who the creation scientists are. I'm referring to people who specialise in creation science, not people of other disciplines who hold creationist beliefs. It's a bit like the difference between a physicist who hold evolutionist views and an evolutionary biologist.

View Post

:rolleyes:
If there's going to be some new, special definition of 'creation scientist', it should've been made clear in the O.P.

But equivocate yourself away, if that's your game.

#83 lehtv

lehtv

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Age: 20
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Edinburgh

Posted 25 November 2009 - 02:48 PM

But equivocate yourself away, if that's your game.

View Post


Don't you roll your eyes there. Please point to me where I have equivocated.

EDIT: I note the thread is titled "Who are the creationist scientists?" but my request to see the creation scientists doesn't refer to the OP but to Anghellik9's post on page 4 about creation scientists, to which Ron replied with a list of creationist scientists.

#84 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 25 November 2009 - 04:07 PM

:rolleyes:
If there's going to be some new, special definition of 'creation scientist', it should've been made clear in the O.P.

But equivocate yourself away, if that's your game.

View Post


I was reading you post, and getting ready to post that he was going to attempt a denial his obvious equivocation, when I read his post and saw that he beat me to my prediction. :lol:

P.S. Don't roll your eyes... Apparently he doesn't like it :lol:

#85 lehtv

lehtv

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Age: 20
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Edinburgh

Posted 25 November 2009 - 04:48 PM

I was reading you post, and getting ready to post that he was going to attempt a denial his obvious equivocation, when I read his post and saw that he beat me to my prediction.  :lol:

P.S. Don't roll your eyes... Apparently he doesn't like it :o

View Post


I don't much appreciate your being so prejudiced and quick to judge, and I hope you appreciate me not being prejudiced against you.

This is the sort of thing I meant by a creation scientist, as opposed to a scientist who happens to be a creationist: http://www.evolution...?showtopic=2919

#86 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 25 November 2009 - 06:38 PM

I don't much appreciate your being so prejudiced and quick to judge, and I hope you appreciate me not being prejudiced against you.

This is the sort of thing I meant by a creation scientist, as opposed to a scientist who happens to be a creationist: http://www.evolution...?showtopic=2919

View Post

:lol:
You change definitions yet again! Now a "creation scientist" is someone who thinks evolutionism is the best thing since sliced bread.

#87 lehtv

lehtv

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Age: 20
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Edinburgh

Posted 25 November 2009 - 08:20 PM

:lol:
You change definitions yet again! Now a "creation scientist" is someone who thinks evolutionism is the best thing since sliced bread.

View Post


What?! Todd Charles Wood clearly states he is not a proponent of evolution. To quote,

Having found most popular arguments about the
human/chimpanzee genome similarity insuffcent, I
fnd myself in the unenviable position of devising my
own explanation.  Since I have none, I will attempt
instead to develop some principles that could guide
research into this problem.


See? He's about RESEARCH, which is how science is done, but he is a "creation biologist", a kind of creation scientist, you could say.

Another quote:

The problem of biological
similarity may be the most important issue in creation
biology.  Prior to Darwin, biological similarity was
interpreted as evidence of the unity of design, as in
Owen’s archetypes.  It is in this context that perhaps
the most satisfying explanation of extremely high
human/chimpanzee similarity is found: Tyson’s. 
Tyson’s conception of the continuous Chain of Being
necessitated a uniform morphological gradient from
animal to human, and thereby necessitated the creation
and persistence of extremely anthropomorphic animals.


Todd seems to be the sort of person who, while holding the a priori view that God exists and the bible is the word of God, thinks the creationists have to explain the same observations as evolutionary biology purports to explain, if their conclusions of design are to have any basis.

#88 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 29 November 2009 - 01:19 PM

I don't much appreciate your being so prejudiced and quick to judge, and I hope you appreciate me not being prejudiced against you.

This is the sort of thing I meant by a creation scientist, as opposed to a scientist who happens to be a creationist: http://www.evolution...?showtopic=2919

View Post


Yeah, it looks like prejudice to me :huh: (emboldening for emphasis).

You wish to prejudge, and yet don't like to be judged? Anyway, my prediction would have been correct regardless of your sensitivities.

#89 bobabelever

bobabelever

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 392 posts
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Arizona

Posted 29 November 2009 - 02:28 PM

I scanned through this thread fairly quickly and I don't see anybody asking the *obvious question!

There are Evolutionary Biologists, relatively speaking probably a fairly new "science". We also have Creation Biologists, probably an even newer "science".

My Point: these "sciences" were named more recently, and on purpose.
Evolutionary Biology = explains life/origins from an evolutionary presumption.
Creation Biology = explains life/origins from a creationist presumption.
(some very strict persons might even call these psuedo sciences :D )

The question that started this thread is:
Who Are The Creationist Scientists?

What about this question:
*Who Are The Evolutionist Scientists?

There have been many answers within this thread that could be given for both sides. Check this link out List of Sciences, notice the words Evolution or Creation are NOT found in any of the sciences listed, not even on the page!

We have biologists that are also evolutionists, but they are not "evolutionist scientists". We also have biologists that are creationists, but they are not "creationist scientists".

:huh:

#90 bobabelever

bobabelever

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 392 posts
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Arizona

Posted 29 November 2009 - 02:53 PM

So, here is the End of this Topic:

As there are no "Evolutionist Scientists", there are also no "Creationist Scientists".

:huh: :D :lol:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users