Date: Fri Apr 14 2006 - 17:05:59 EDT
At 04:25 PM 4/14/2006, Freeman, Louise Margaret wrote:
>Details here. Interesting turn of events.
>
><http://www.towersonline.net/story.php?grp=news&id=344>http://www.towersonline.net/story.php?grp=news&id=344
@ Items of interest. ~ Janice
7/3/2003
http://www.christianforums.com/t43741&page=12
Ok, I just got a email from Dr. Wise. This is what he said:
"I am a young-age creationist because the Bible
indicates the universe is young. Given what we
currently think we understand about the world,
the majority of the scientific evidence favors an
old earth and universe, not a young one. I would
therefore say that anyone who claims that the
earth is young for scientific evidence alone is
scientifically ignorant. Thus I would suggest
that the challenge you are trying to meet is unmeetable."
__________________
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit
of God, they are the sons of God. Conflicts
between Science and the Bible arise from either a
lack of scientific knowledge or a defective
understanding of the Bible. Moses Maimonides
*
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=44017
December 19th 2004 , 04:39 PM
Post #7
"...there is new breed of YEC out there, of which
Kurt Wise is an example, who recognize that there
are scientific problems with their
Weltanschauung. I knew Kurt was exceptional, but
there are more of his stripe. Affectionately, I'd
like to refer to them as neo-YECs, as opposed to
the Wieland-Ham-Morris-Safarti-Jorge YECs for
which I would propose the oxymoronic moniker paleo-YECs.
To wit, here's a quote from the ASA (American
Scientific Affiliation) Listserve in response to
my criticism of an article in their journal by
paleo-YEC Robert Gentry, who thinks the Big Bang
is obviated from conservation of energy considerations:
Message on ASA Listserve, December 10, 2004
Mr X, the young physicist (now studying History
and Philosophy of Science for a second doctorate)
who responds to Gentry is *also* a YEC, Dick--and
someone who has twice attended the ASA meeting on
a student scholarship (the first time I was
program chair and I offered him the scholarship
for a very good paper). But he *isn't* Ken Ham,
or Robert Gentry. He's part of what I'd say is a
group of "new style" YECs, people like Paul
Nelson and Kurt Wise who admit the problems with
their position but hold it nevertheless for
Biblical reasons. Nelson is completing a
monograph, "On Common Descent," for publication
in a mainstream evolution series edited by
someone at the Univ of Chicago; when's the last
time a YEC got a book accepted as a serious scientific work?
The main problem with YECs, other than the
obvious one that their position is wrong, is that
most YECs simply preach to the choir; they do not
acknowledge the obvious difficulties with their
position, indeed they seem to see the admission
of serious difficulties as a form of theological
heresy. You can't lead your army if you admit you
aren't winning. But Paul, Kurt, Mr X, and some
others are very different in their overall
attitude. For this reason I fear that they do not
hold the future of the movement in their hands,
but I hope this fear is unfounded.
----------
© source where applicable
I brought up this issue in
<http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=822458&postcount=1>this
thread.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=822458&postcount=1
[see below]
And for a little nostalgia as far as the
paleo-YEC Jorge is concerned
<http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showpost.php?p=432719&postcount=65>here
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=432719&postcount=65
is the post I made back in February '04 when
Jorge first started posting. At the time I was
still naive about how bad the disconnect was
between Fundamentalist Christians and reality.
I've evolved in my knowledge to the point that
there are very few surprises regarding the
fideism and lack of scientific knowledge among
the paleo-YEC apologists and their robotically loyal following.
I apologize to everyone. Many moons ago, I used
to be polite, but now I'm just p-offed. R
*
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=822458&postcount=1
<http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/member.php?u=2970>rogero Willoughby
December 12th 2004 , 02:32 PM
Inside the mind of YEC Cosmologist (not for the faint of heart!)
The American Scientific Affliation
(<http://www.asa3.org/>www.asa3.org) is a
Christian organization of scientists and those
interested in the discussion of Science and
Faith. There are only a very few true YEC
members, and these are mainly of the "new"
variety YEC. e.g., one unnamed member is (in the
Kurt Wise mold) recognizes that YECism is often
at loggerheads with science and that ultimately
faith in Scripture must be the ultimate arbiter
of truth. Even though I respect these neo-YECs
for their honesty, I vehemently disagree with
their conclusions. ASA is trying hard to not
exclude the YEC who wants an honest dialogue, and
for this I respect the organization greatly.
That being said, in the December 2004 issue of
ASA's journal Perspectives on Science and
Christian Faith there was a dialogue on Big Bang
cosmology (BBC) between the paleo-YEC (how about
that for oxymoronic terminology?
[]
) Robert V. Gentry and a Christian opponent.
There were three articles. The first addressed
Gentry's notion that BBC is obviated by a
violation of conservation of energy. Gentry then
wrote a response to attempt to answer these
objections. Lastly the opponent was given the
last word in pointing out the flaws in Gentry's argument.
Here I'd like to show an example of the kind of
thoughts bouncing around in the cranium of a
dyed-in-the-wool 6Ka/6 day/24hr YEC with a degree
in physics. Note how he happily matches Scripture to his pet CCU hypothesis.
I will give two quotations from the article. The
first is the last paragraph on page 275, which in
turn references an endnote on page 276, which is the second quotation below.
Robert V. Gentry, "Collapse of Big Bang Cosmology
and the Emergence of the New Cosmic Center Model
of the Universe", PSCF, December 2004, page 275, final paragraph
"This model may also be of interest to the
Christian scientific community, for I have
already suggested this nearby Center may be none
other than the throne of God described in Hebrews
8-10 and Revelation 4 and 20. Hebrews 10 in
particular describes the ministry of Christ as
our great high Priest officiating his blood in
behalf of sinners on the throne of the universe
in the heavenly Sanctuary. It is on this basis
that I suggest the spherical symmetry of the
universe as seen from our point of observation is
not a cosmic accident, but instead a direct
result of God not only creating the visible
universe on the literal Day 4 of creation week**,
but of doing it so as to provide unambiguous
astronomical proof that a nearby universal Center
does exist, with the logical deduction that he
intends for Earth's inhabitants to reflect
strongly on this fact as evidence that he is both
Creator and Ruler of the Universe and Author of
the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:1-7)."
----------
© source where applicable
**Refers to endnote #59:
[cite=Ibid, endnote #59, page 276]
