Re: [asa] Yes -- the YECs are still winning

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
Date: Mon Mar 30 2009 - 16:05:40 EDT

I was one at one time, until I discovered that I had been lied to. What
forced me to first change was discovering that radioactive dating could
not be off by much, and that the atomic bomb and other phenomena depended
on the same science as dating. An error in dating meant that Hiroshima
and Nagasaki couldn't have happened. I have read a good deal of the YEC
literature and discovered that the "authorities" advance incompatible
explanations for different phenomena at times, and at other times produce
"explanations" that are impossible. For example, the guy who was an
outstanding plant breeder (can't think of his name) said the reason there
were more tree rings in the bristle cone pines than years back to the
Flood was that some years produced more than one ring. Honest appraisal
recognized that the pines are more likely to skip rings on bad years,
fairly common under the extreme conditions of the area. The extension of
the tree ring data now requires that there be two rings most years. Tree
ring data in Europe goes back about 12Ky. But can you point to anything
in ICR or AiG or other YEC sites that recognizes this?

George mentioned Oklo. Now comes RATE, placing almost all the energy from
radioactive disintegration into a couple days at the time of creation and
during the year of the Flood. This means that the temperature during the
Flood would vaporize the most refractive materials on earth, but it is
blandly stated that the temperature did not rise above 150 F. Should I
respect those who peddle impossibilities as Biblical truth?
Dave (ASA)

On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 22:51:08 -0600 wjp <wjp@swcp.com> writes:
> Dave:
>
> Such a view would entail some very low opinion of the YEC as a
> person.
>
> I think it is very possible for us to be vastly mistaken and that
> God
> did not intend to mislead. Your view appears remarkably similar to
> Bertrand Russell in why he doesn't believe in God: To little
> evidence.
>
> Did God intend to mislead Bertrand Russell?
>
> bill
>
> On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:27:03 -0700, "D. F. Siemens, Jr."
> <dfsiemensjr@juno.com> wrote:
> > These are compatible provided you make one assumption, that God
> made the
> > creation to mislead those who are not of the elect. Most people do
> not
> > put the /Omphalos/ assumption quite this strongly, but the
> requirement of
> > your two points is that what we observe is intended to mislead. Of
> > course, the elect are only YEC. But their God is not the Truth.
> You need
> > to revise I John 3:19.
> > Dave (ASA)
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:09:17 -0600 wjp <wjp@swcp.com> writes:
> >> George:
> >>
> >> This is quite a strong statement. I take it that you believe it
> is
> >> impossible
> >> that the following two propositions could be true.
> >>
> >> 1) All that you (and others) regard as evidence for an ancient
> world
> >> obtains.
> >> 2) The world is young.
> >>
> >> Proposition (1) presumes the entire world of human experience as
> you
> >> take it
> >> to be and all the theories and instruments employed in the
> >> determination that
> >> such and such serves as evidence for an old world. By "evidence"
> I
> >> mean what
> >> Bridgman means: a meter reading. The world that obtains has
> these
> >> meter
> >> readings, these instruments, and theories. That is, what obtains
> is
> >> what we
> >> can "objectively" associate with a state of world and human
> >> understanding.
> >>
> >> Both propositions must come to some common understanding of "old"
> >> and "young,"
> >> that is, some standard of temporal measurement, although science
> >> lacks any
> >> absolute measure of time intervals.
> >>
> >> George, if this is what you believe, and I take it at least many
> on
> >> this list
> >> agree, then I begin to grasp the nature of the attitudes
> reflected
> >> on this list
> >> towards YEC.
> >>
> >> I certainly do not accept that the two propositions mentioned
> above
> >> are contraries.
> >> Indeed, I am amazed that anyone could believe so.
> >>
> >> But so it goes.
> >>
> >> bill powers
> >> White, SD
> >>
> >> On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:39:53 -0400, "George Murphy"
> >> <GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com> wrote:
> >> > There is plenty of scientific evidence that the earth is old
> that
> >> is just
> >> > as compelling as the evidence for the age of distant stars. In
> >> addition,
> >> > a strict literal interepretation of Gen.1 places the creation
> of
> >> the stars
> >> > after that of the earth.
> >> >
> >> > There is no YEC view that is congruent with objective reality.
> >> >
> >> > Shalom
> >> > George
> >> > http://home.roadrunner.com/~scitheologyglm
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: David Clounch
> >> > To: Dehler, Bernie
> >> > Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> >> > Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 7:58 PM
> >> > Subject: Re: [asa] Yes -- the YECs are still winning
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > So when you observe a supernova explosion at 90 million
> light
> >> years
> >> > away, that event didn't really happen because the universe is
> only
> >> a few
> >> > thousand years old.
> >> >
> >> > With this logic we could also all believe that everything
> was
> >> just
> >> > made 10 seconds ago- including the memories of all our past
> >> events, which
> >> > didn't really happen.
> >> >
> >> > ,,,Bernie
> >> > Bernie,
> >> > I had not read this until now. You point out something I
> have
> >> been
> >> > thinking of for a long time. The YEC position can produce a
> >> quirky
> >> > phenomenology. The real problem with this phenomenology is it
> is
> >> also
> >> > FATAL to the concept of objective reality. If I were a YEC I
> >> would run
> >> > from this as fast as I could. Christianity and the very idea
> of
> >> truth
> >> > are both based on the idea of an objective reality. As is
> >> science.
> >> >
> >> > One must ask, is there a form of YEC that teaches that the
> earth
> >> is
> >> > young but the universe old? That seems to be the only chance
> YEC
> >> has of
> >> > being congruent with objective reality.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> >> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]
> >> > On Behalf Of John Walley
> >> > Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 6:13 AM
> >> > To: asa@calvin.edu; Randy Isaac
> >> > Subject: Re: [asa] Yes -- the YECs are still winning
> >> >
> >> > I think it is probably wise to leave the door open to
> >> "appearance of
> >> > age" YEC because at the end of the day we have to accept
> >> supernatural
> >> > intervention at some point anyway and we can't scientifically
> rule
> >> this
> >> > out. It is probably a good strategy to just draw the line on
> >> countering
> >> > and disproving false statements that are offered as scientific
> >> support of
> >> > these views. It is a free country and people can believe
> whatever
> >> myths or
> >> > fables they want as long as they don't try to represent it as
> >> science.
> >> >
> >> > But by this logic would ASA take issue with RTB statements
> >> that
> >> > newfound function for junk DNA and the function argument in
> >> general negate
> >> > the pseudogene evidence for common descent? Doesn't that fall
> >> afoul of the
> >> > criterion for integrity in science?
> >> >
> >> > Ironically, this postion backs RTB into the corner of
> >> "appearance of
> >> > ancestry" just like the YECs appearance of age. They will admit
> it
> >> looks
> >> > that way but they appeal to a deceptive record of nature and a
> >> deceptive
> >> > Creator to avoid the obvious implications if the science. I
> >> concede they
> >> > should be allowed to believe that if they want but they
> shouldn't
> >> be
> >> > allowed to get away with saying science supports them in that
> >> without a
> >> > response. Does ASA officially address this anywhere?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> > John
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --- On Wed, 2/4/09, Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > From: Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net>
> >> > > Subject: Re: [asa] Yes -- the YECs are still winning
> >> > > To: asa@calvin.edu
> >> > > Date: Wednesday, February 4, 2009, 10:24 PM
> >> > > Bernie wrote:
> >> > > > But even the ASA doesn't have a position against
> >> > > YEC, so maybe it is true? ;-)
> >> > >
> >> > > From PSCF June 2007 Vol. 59 No. 2 p. 143-146
> >> > >
> >> > > "The ASA does not take a position on issues when there
> >> > > is honest disagreement among Christians provided there is
> >> > > adherence to our statement of faith and to integrity in
> >> > > science. Accordingly, the ASA neither endorses nor
> opposes
> >> > > young-earth creationism which recognizes the possibility
> of
> >> > > a recent creation with appearance of age or which
> >> > > acknowledges the unresolved discrepancy between
> scientific
> >> > > data and a young-earth position. However, claims that
> >> > > scientific data affirm a young earth do not meet the
> >> > > criterion of integrity in science. Any portrayal of the
> RATE
> >> > > project as confirming scientific support for a young
> earth
> >> > > contradicts the RATE project's own report. The ASA can
> >> > > and does oppose such deception."
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
> with
> >> > > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
> >> > > message.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> >> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> >> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >>
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> >> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >>
> >>
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > Smell the difference quality potpourri can make. Click here!
> >
>
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTK5xfw6Xis0FawMsmrw0O7Q
xD1PTEmfgUUKuHEaujWAbCSH6yT9te/
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Mar 30 16:09:35 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 30 2009 - 16:09:43 EDT