Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Do modern creation scientists accept Immutability Of Species

Page 2 of 6 [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

(please read before answering) Do scientists who are young earth creationists accept the notion of Immutability Of Species?
Yes 38%  38%  [ 3 ]
No 25%  25%  [ 2 ]
Other 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
None Of The Above 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
All Of The Above 13%  13%  [ 1 ]
I want to see the results before I reply. 25%  25%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 8

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

04 Dec 2009, 4:41 pm

MartyMoose wrote:
How does a creationist pass BIO 101 to become a scientist?

They take the class. Do well on the exams. Do the homework etc. How do you think they'd pass? I mean, it isn't as if biology has ideological purity tests. It is just a class.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Dec 2009, 5:36 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
No one who has earned a genuine PhD in biological sciences is going to entertain the notion of immutable species.


I agree with you that immutability of species is crap, however, this is also in the form of "no true Scotsman".


With one major exception. To earn a PhD in a biological scientific subject, one must do the research, do some of the experiments, be familiar with the rest. In short biology is based on FACT, not on faith.

It is FACT that differentiates science from relegious FICTION, which is what faith is based on.

ruveyn



Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

04 Dec 2009, 5:44 pm

ruveyn wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
No one who has earned a genuine PhD in biological sciences is going to entertain the notion of immutable species.


I agree with you that immutability of species is crap, however, this is also in the form of "no true Scotsman".


With one major exception. To earn a PhD in a biological scientific subject, one must do the research, do some of the experiments, be familiar with the rest. In short biology is based on FACT, not on faith.

It is FACT that differentiates science from relegious FICTION, which is what faith is based on.

ruveyn

Actually, ruveyn, I would imagine that religious studies people also tend to agree on certain facts about religions, whether these people are inside the faith or outside of it. Religions have facts about them in many cases. Think about Judaism, there is a Torah, there is a Mishnah, there are major rabbis, there is the cultural history of Jewish people, etc.



sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 71
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

04 Dec 2009, 8:05 pm

Destruction scientists topic

Instead of creation scientist, I believe the most accurate term is creationist., and if someone believes life is created ex nihilo then it follows that once a species of life appears it does not change. Strange and foolish. :P :roll:


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

04 Dec 2009, 9:25 pm

sartresue wrote:
Destruction scientists topic

Instead of creation scientist, I believe the most accurate term is creationist.,

Not really. For some terminology as I understand it:

Creationist can apply to anyone who holds to either young earth or old earth creationism, regardless of education level.
Young earth creationist includes both laymen and creationists with post-secondary education (associate's, bachelor's, master's, and doctorate's).
Old earth creationist equally includes both laymen and creationists with post-secondary education (associate's, bachelor's, master's, and doctorate's).
A creation scientist can include both young earth and old earth creationists, who have a doctorate in a scientific field.

People such as listed here are examples of creation scientists: http://creation.com/scientists-alive-to ... f-creation


sartresue wrote:
and if someone believes life is created ex nihilo then it follows that once a species of life appears it does not change. Strange and foolish. :P :roll:


Actually that does not follow Even in the 1800's when fixity of species was a popular view, even then it was recognized that selective breeding can make new breeds. Such was based on Mendelian genetics at that time. But even moreover since the start of modern creationism in the 20th century, the view on fixity of species has been rejected by practically all creationists who are also scientists. There may be a few that argue it still, but it is not all of us. But whether there are or not, it is incorrect to assume that because some may that all do.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

04 Dec 2009, 10:32 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Think about Judaism, there is a Torah, there is a Mishnah, there are major rabbis, there is the cultural history of Jewish people, etc.


And it is all man-made hocus pocus. Science is based on the facts of the real world, not on wishes and faith.

ruveyn



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 Dec 2009, 11:04 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
A creation scientist can include both young earth and old earth creationists, who have a doctorate in a scientific field.

People such as listed here are examples of creation scientists: http://creation.com/scientists-alive-to ... f-creation

Still a misnomer- there is no such thing as "creation science" and thus no creation scientists. There are scientists who are also creationists, but virtually all of them work in fields unrelated to biology.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

05 Dec 2009, 3:29 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

People such as listed here are examples of creation scientists: http://creation.com/scientists-alive-to ... f-creation


:lol: :lol: :lol:

At first glance one might think WOW thats a lot of Doctorates until one has a look at this

Image

Those figures are for the US only. All of the people on this table have the scientific criteria to go onto the list you so proudly display. So in 2008, in the US alone there were 198988 doctorates awarded, compare this to your extensive list of 208 people with doctorates some of whom received their doctorates over 30 years ago. Now i will be the first to admit that there are likely to be some creationists in the 2008 alumni. I really cannot be bothered working out the percentage of doctors on your list to the total doctorates awarded over the last 30 years but I think you get my drift.

posting "people with doctorates who believe in creation'' is meaningless. What is important is the science and the correct and honest interpretation and presentation of the science. Something creationists fail at in spectacular fashion


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

05 Dec 2009, 3:47 am

Dent, you might be interested in having a look at Project Steve. As it turns out, there are more doctorate-degree-holding evolutionists named Steve than there are doctorate-degree-holding creationists.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

05 Dec 2009, 3:56 am

Orwell wrote:
Dent, you might be interested in having a look at Project Steve. As it turns out, there are more doctorate-degree-holding evolutionists named Steve than there are doctorate-degree-holding creationists.



:lol:


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

05 Dec 2009, 8:25 am

Orwell wrote:
Dent, you might be interested in having a look at Project Steve. As it turns out, there are more doctorate-degree-holding evolutionists named Steve than there are doctorate-degree-holding creationists.


Orwell, or anyone who would hopefully answer me seriously: can you see any of the inaccuracies, twisting, spin, or any other form of deceit in this preamble?

Quote:
NCSE's "Project Steve" is a tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism."

Creationists draw up these lists to try to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a "theory in crisis." Not everyone realizes that this claim is unfounded. NCSE has been asked numerous times to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution. Although we easily could have done so, we have resisted. We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!

Project Steve pokes fun at this practice and, because "Steves" are only about 1% of scientists, it also makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution. And it honors the late Stephen Jay Gould, evolutionary biologist, NCSE supporter, and friend.

We'd like to think that after Project Steve, we'll have seen the last of bogus "scientists doubting evolution" lists, but it's probably too much to ask. We hope that when such lists are proposed, reporters and other citizens will ask, "How many Steves are on your list!?"



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

05 Dec 2009, 8:34 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Orwell wrote:
Dent, you might be interested in having a look at Project Steve. As it turns out, there are more doctorate-degree-holding evolutionists named Steve than there are doctorate-degree-holding creationists.


Orwell, or anyone who would hopefully answer me seriously: can you see any of the inaccuracies, twisting, spin, or any other form of deceit in this preamble?

Quote:
NCSE's "Project Steve" is a tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism."

Creationists draw up these lists to try to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a "theory in crisis." Not everyone realizes that this claim is unfounded. NCSE has been asked numerous times to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution. Although we easily could have done so, we have resisted. We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!

Project Steve pokes fun at this practice and, because "Steves" are only about 1% of scientists, it also makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution. And it honors the late Stephen Jay Gould, evolutionary biologist, NCSE supporter, and friend.

We'd like to think that after Project Steve, we'll have seen the last of bogus "scientists doubting evolution" lists, but it's probably too much to ask. We hope that when such lists are proposed, reporters and other citizens will ask, "How many Steves are on your list!?"


Since, in your photo, you clearly show yourself perched on some guy's shoulder, your denial holds little value. I have no doubt you really are a parakeet and somehow creationism appeals to you whether you hold a doctorate or not.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

05 Dec 2009, 9:51 am

Sand wrote:
Since, in your photo, you clearly show yourself perched on some guy's shoulder, your denial holds little value. I have no doubt you really are a parakeet and somehow creationism appeals to you whether you hold a doctorate or not.


Are you trying to be humorous?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

05 Dec 2009, 9:56 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Are you trying to be humorous?


Sand trying to be humorous. That is funny.

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

05 Dec 2009, 10:01 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Sand wrote:
Since, in your photo, you clearly show yourself perched on some guy's shoulder, your denial holds little value. I have no doubt you really are a parakeet and somehow creationism appeals to you whether you hold a doctorate or not.


Are you trying to be humorous?


Goodness gracious no! I am merely looking at reality from your point of view.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

05 Dec 2009, 10:20 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:

People such as listed here are examples of creation scientists: http://creation.com/scientists-alive-to ... f-creation


:lol: :lol: :lol:

At first glance one might think WOW thats a lot of Doctorates until one has a look at this

Image

Those figures are for the US only. All of the people on this table have the scientific criteria to go onto the list you so proudly display. So in 2008, in the US alone there were 198988 doctorates awarded, compare this to your extensive list of 208 people with doctorates some of whom received their doctorates over 30 years ago. Now i will be the first to admit that there are likely to be some creationists in the 2008 alumni. I really cannot be bothered working out the percentage of doctors on your list to the total doctorates awarded over the last 30 years but I think you get my drift.

posting "people with doctorates who believe in creation'' is meaningless. What is important is the science and the correct and honest interpretation and presentation of the science. Something creationists fail at in spectacular fashion


Firstly, I was not trying to use or imply the ploy of argumentum ad populum.
Second, there has never been a complete listing of Creationists who have doctorates.
Third, the chart there does not separate based on belief system or ideology followed, so there is no way to determine actual percentiles from that list.
Forth, I wanted to delineate between creationists in general, which Orwell has personal examples of, seemingly to him, espousing the dead notion of fixity of species, and those who have degrees in scientific fields, including areas of biology.