You wrote:
====================================================================
Now, a direct question to the YEC types on this list. In the past, I've
been accused on this and other (ASA, SCICHR) lists of being a bit harsh in
my critiques of YEC. Why? Because I've said that some of them deliberately
lie and misrepresent mainstream scientific data. So, my questions for the
YEC on this list are:
Doesn't Humpreys appear to be deliberately misrepresenting scientific data in
this, rather clearcut, example?
Is this a way for a Christian scientist (Humphreys has a Ph.D. in physics and
can not claim ignorance) to behave?
Will YECs therefore stop using Humphreys claims in their defense of a young
Earth and repudiate his methodology here of misrepresenting data?
Know what, I'll make a prediction. YECs will ignore these questions and keep
referring to Humphreys' arguments for a young Earth as being valid. That's why
I believe many in the YEC movement are either willfully ignorant (they don't
WANT to know the truth) or morally bankrupt (they dont' CARE what the truth is).
Comments?
- Steve.
======================================================================
Steve, I think you are definitely correct in one thing...you ARE harsh in
your critiques of YEC, both as individual brothers in Christ and as a
movement. You do qualify your either/or comment above by saying that you
think this applies to "many" in the YEC movement, which is better than
a blanket statement, but it seems to me you have committed a logical
fallacy by giving this either/or dichotomy. Those are not the only logical
possibilities.
I have no sympathy with the YEC position, and many people on this list and
elsewhere have documented the sloppiness of some YEC writers and their
refusal to retract arguments that have been shown to be in error, even when
the error is pointed out by someone on their "side" of the issue. But
it is certainly possible that "many" of individuals committed to a YEC
position suffer from a paradigm-blindness which makes it impossible for
them to even *consider* a radical revision (Kuhn might call it a revolution)
of their scientific position. Is this willful ignorance? Is it morally
bankrupt? No on both counts! It may ultimately be *wrong*, but it does
not fit your two either/or categories...not by a longshot.
Here I would appeal to YECs on the list (Art, perhaps) or former YECs
(like Glenn) to offer their perspectives. From what I have heard of his
description of his scientific journey on origin issues, I do not think
that Glenn, even when he was vigorously contending for a YEC position,
was EITHER willfully ignorant of the scientific issues OR morally
bankrupt. And from what I have read of his work, Art does not fall into
either category.
Steve, surely you are aware of the controlling influence of a paradigm
in a scientific research program. The YEC paradigm, even though it is
for all practical purposes derived from the Bible, acts to both define
and restrict the kinds of questions and problems that YECs consider
and attack in their research (here I am speaking of individuals like
Art who are active in research, not the layperson or pastor who merely
reads the popular literature). While the influence of their paradigm
may ultimately cause them to err in their science, it is certainly not
the first example of this in the history of science. Was Max Planck
"willfully ignorant" or "morally bankrupt" because he was unwilling to
take the logical step (which sprang from his own work in blackbody
radiation) of positing the actual existence of the photon? Einstein
relied heavily on Planck's work in his interpretation of the photoelectric
effect, and he was puzzled by Planck's unwillingness to believe in
the "real" existence of photons.
Now the YEC research program may well be a degenerating one, which is
reduced to advocating ad hoc theories to "save the appearances" of the
scientific data. But even this does not make all or even "many" of
the practitioners willfully ignorant or morally bankrupt. Steve, if you
goal is to turn brothers away from their errors, then I think a bit more
charity and civility is in order. The truth is the truth, and should
not be trimmed. But the kinds of sweeping, unflattering generalizations
you have made, based as they are on the unseen motivations of those
in the YEC movement, will not accomplish this goal. Do you have another
goal?
Stan Zygmunt
Dept of Physics and Astronomy
Valparaiso University
"The Lord's bondservant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all,
able to teach, patient
when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps
God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth..."
2 Tim. 2:24-25