Can a young earth creationist be a legitimate scientist?
Offline I saw this article, and thought it would make for interesting discussion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/12/science/12geologist.html?_r=1&ref=science&oref=slogin
But Dr. Ross is hardly a conventional paleontologist. He is a “young earth creationist” — he believes that the Bible is a literally true account of the creation of the universe, and that the earth is at most 10,000 years old.
For him, Dr. Ross said, the methods and theories of paleontology are one “paradigm” for studying the past, and Scripture is another. In the paleontological paradigm, he said, the dates in his dissertation are entirely appropriate. The fact that as a young earth creationist he has a different view just means, he said, “that I am separating the different paradigms.”
I don't know what to make of this guy. He really seems like a complete fraud in that he is basically putting forth research that he himself believes to be wrong.
“The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion.”
“It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God, but to create him.”
<- Login to post comments
This relates to a post I made to 'Chosenby Pasta' just now. Academia is full of well-meaning frauds. The entire doctrinal system selects for obedience and subordination to a particular ideology at an almost unconscious level (somewhat akin to Darwinian selection). This has been true throughout most of history. In this clip Chomsky gives the example from WWI (as it is far enough away for us to have some objectivity). The same applies in many other fields.
Tim.
May Zeus be with you.