"A final comment on Noll's use of the term "simple" in association with the
young-earth theory. William of Occam, a late medieval philosopher, developed
an intellectual rule-of-thumb that became known as Occam's razor. His
principle was that in the absence of decisive evidence or argument, the
simpler theory is more likely to be correct. Copernicus and Kepler derived
from Occam's razor encouragement to question the geocentric theory of the
universe. So far in my inquiries, I would have to say that in Biblical
interpretation Occam's razor cuts in favor of the young-earth theory, but
apparently cuts against in interpretation of the universe. "
Two points here -- I'm interested in how they would be answered.
1. "in the absence of decisive evidence or argument." The evidence in favor
of an old earth, and arguments for an old earth, can hardly be taken as
"absent."
2. As has been pointed out by many, with the single exception of Gosse's young
earth
theory, as discussed in OMPHALOS (also known as "last Sundayism"), I don't
know of any SCIENTIFIC theory of origins which involves a young earth. Yes,
there
are religious/philosophical ideas -- but they appear to be sterile, leading
nowhere
(in the scientific sense).
Both of these argue against using Bill Occam's idea as favoring a young earth in
any way.
This issue (and others related) are debated on a continual basis in Compuserve's
RELIGIOUS ISSUES forum, section 5, where I serve as sysop. You are all invited
to participate, of course.
Burgy