Statler Waldorf introduction.

[Statler Waldorf]

Nah I disagree. There are lots of young Earth guys doing good work in the fields of Biology and Geology. Evidence is interpreted using a Worldview, there is no real evidence that conflicts with the Biblical view of Creation because evidence itself doesn't say anything. I feel the Biblical view of Creation is the most consistant view when all the evidence is taken into consideration.

That's kind of the thing - creationists tend to think that evidence has to be interpreted according to a worldview - like the christian worldview, the jewish worldview, the naturalist/atheist worldview, etc. Scientists shape their worldview based on evidence.

As Adrian pointed out, when evidence doesn't fit a scientist's pre-establishd view of things, that view changes according to new evidence, assuming it is substantiated through peer review and the scientific process. For example, the discovery of the first dinosaur fossils and other prehistoric fossils in addition to the study of the relationship between all life on earth led to Evolutoinary Theory - not the other way around.

This is why virtually all reputable biologists don't believe in, for example, Y-E creationism. It directly contradicts the science of the field. The same goes for astronomy and Y-E creationism because the laws of physics absolutely refute the idea that the earth or the universe is less than many billions of years old.

Thats why I would never feel comfortable with, for example, a Y-E creationist teaching physics, astronomy, or biology, among other sciences. The two schools of thought are utterly conflicted with one another.

Well bigotry is wrong no matter who it is against, even Creationists.

Evidence cannot be interpreted without presuppositions. Presuppostions come directly from Worldviews. Hence why you can show a first grade student all the radiometric evidence you want and they will not independently arrive at the same conclusions as you because they lack your presuppositions. Gather a group of Scientists together who all have the same presuppositions and show them evidence and they will arrive at the same conclusions. However, this does not mean this is necessarily the correct conclusion.

The Dinosaur example was a bad oen considering they were first discovered by Owen who was a Creationist and a staunch opponent of Darwin.

There are plenty of reputable Biologists, Geologists, and Astronomers who are Y-E, it's pretty much an urban legend to think otherwise. You don't think they have models and theories to explain Dinosaurs and Distant Starlight? They do.

---

Not sure why it would give you the chills. My classes scored in the top 5th percentile in the entire State and even higher nationally. 45 percent of my class went on to have full ride academic scholarships for their University studies. Those numbers give me chills, but in the good way.

Just out of curiosity, is your shift button stuck?

Nope.