RE: Grand Canyon Tears America Apart in Battle Between Science and Faith

From: Glenn Morton <>
Date: Sat Jan 17 2004 - 23:30:34 EST

> -----Original Message-----
> From: []On
> Behalf Of William Hamilton
> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2004 8:35 PM
> On Saturday, January 17, 2004, at 03:08 PM, John W Burgeson wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know the names of these so called "leading Earth-science
> > organizations?" I sure hope the ASA was not one of them.
> >
> Since it is ASA policy not to take a position on origins, I presume the
> ASA was _not_ one of the "leading Earth-science organizations". Burgy
> is right: you don't get anywhere by trying to suppress a point of view.
> Best to let its advocates state their position openly and debate them.

The problem here is the same problem that faced Algeria a few years ago.
They were going to have a democratic election. The party which was going to
win was a party that promised to do away with democracy and debate and turn
Algeria into an Islamic republic. The army decided they couldn't go that
way and stopped the election. There was a civil war.

The reason I raise the Algeria situation is that there are parallels with
what the YECs want. They don't want debate. They don't actually debate the
issue if you analyze the situation. Debate requires the possiblity that one
might change one's mind. For the most part, they never ever change their
mind no matter what data you put before them. I am one of the few publishing
YECs who ever defected. Nicolas Rupke is the only other one I know of. This
tells you how rarely people actually leave YEC. The game played is:
Evolutionist puts data before they YEC. The YEC says, "I believe the Bible"
which really means he believes his interpretation of the Bible. But that
isn't a debate. It is a stone wall. Take a look at my threads at TheologyWeb
Alternatively, the YEC simply goes silent when faced with geological data
and won't respond at all.

 And if they had their way, they would not allow evolution to be taught.
Much of the home schooling curricula teaches a false view of evolution and a
false view of its weaknesses. That is what they want taught. While I don't
like suppressing viewpoints any more than anyone else, it is hard to have a
free debate when the other side doesn't care what you say--in their eyes, we
are wrong regardless. My point here is just to note that there isn't a

> As much as I disagree with the YEC crowd, I cringe when I hear about
> the YEC writers who use assumed names lest they lose their jobs.

As a YEC who lost his job for being a YEC, I abhor people using this area to
fire people because of their belief system. I have worked with a couple of
young-earth geologists and geophysicists. I would work with them again.
They didn't bring their views to the job (which tells you something about
the value of those views in oil exploration) and they were quite
knowledgeable about the problems geology presented to their position. Doing
what they do is OK and firing them because of their beliefs would be
ethically disgraceful.

That being said, I know of a couple of evolutionists who unfortunately found
themselves working for YECs and they got fired also. So the problem goes
both ways.
Received on Sat Jan 17 23:31:15 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jan 17 2004 - 23:31:16 EST