Throwing out evidence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-02-2012, 08:47 AM (This post was last modified: 09-02-2012 09:04 AM by Geode.)
Throwing out evidence
Having particpated in many threads at the http://www.evolutionfairytale.com forum (over 600 posts before being banned) I noticed a recurrent theme that was embraced by just about every Young Earth Creationist I encountered posting there on the subject of the radiometric dating of rocks. They claimed that geologists throw out age dates that do not fit in with their "evolutionary" assumptions about the presumed old age of the earth. Let us ignore the ignorance used here, that geologists are typically not in the practice of going through a process of such age dating to prove or disprove evolution and focus upon the claim of throwing out evidence. First of all I doubt any of the YECs had actually read any articles in technical journals, they just accepted what they found in creationist writings on the matter. I have read many, and in truth this claim is basically a strawman or an intentional lie. However, it is true that practically every YEC writing I have seen is in fact guilty of leaving out any evidence that they feel does not fit their theory. Unfortunately what they do include is usually force fit and misapplied, but that is another topic.

The last discussion I was having before being banned at that forum was about whether or not an unconformity exists between the Redwall Limestone and Muav Limestone in the Grand Canyon. A creationist report was being relied upon for the claim that no evidence of erosion (proof of the unconformity, where strata had been removed) existed at this surface.

Waisgerber, W. G., G. F. Howe and E. L. Williams. 1987. Mississippian and Cambrian strata interbedding: 200 million year hiatus in question. CRSQ 23:160-7.

In this paper a quote is made from:

McKee, E.D. and Gutschick, R.C., 1969, History of the Redwall Limestone of Northern Arizona, Geological Society of America Memoir 114, 726 p.

"At 11 of the 21 localities examined, including most of those in eastern Grand Canyon, no evidence could be detected at the contact: the surface appeared even and flat... Where evidence of an erosion surface is obscure, recognition everywhere of the basal contact of the Redwall Limestone is not easy..."

So what was left out where those three dots appear after "flat and even"...?

"At 11 of the 21 localities examined, including most of those in eastern Grand Canyon, no evidence could be detected at the contact: the surface appeared even and flat. In contrast, at most of the western localities an irregular surface of erosion or a basal conglomerate, or both mark the contact. Where evidence of an erosion surface is obscure, recognition everywhere of the basal contact of the Redwall Limestone is not easy..."

The authors of first paper I cited studied just one section along the North Kaibab Trail, yet made a claim for the contact in the entire canyon. The earlier paper had studied many sections. The poster at that other forum (also an admin.) posted a picture making the claim that inter-fingering of the Redwall and Muav was present and obvious and kept standing on the article that studied a section elsewhere, not shown in the picture. I asked him twice the location that the photo showed and he ignored me twice. Such inter-fingering would not fit in with there being an unconformity present. The Waisgerber paper claimed inter-fingering in the area of the same section that Mckee and Gutschick did not.

I think my posting in non-acceptance of the YEC claim led to my being banned. They really have a problem with somebody pointing out that the evidence does not support their claims. All they have left in defense is denial and censorship, dealt out with a heavy dose of hypocrisy. They also routinely claim on that board that mainstream scientists are part of a great conspiracy to keep YECs and their evidence for a young earth out of peer-reviewed journals, yet YEC papers usually lack any real research and resort to what I have just outlined. Their most typical construction relies heavily on ignoring most available evidence and resorting to strawman arguments.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2012, 09:41 AM
RE: Throwing out evidence
Well... yeah.

I mean the YEC point of view is the most difficult to defend in this day and age. The only way to do it is to blatantly ignore the prove-able facts. Nothing else to it. Which boils down of course to lying to yourself and to your children.
That's what it is. Lying. I have no understanding of how these people think. It's completely opposite to how I think.
At least evolutionary creationists try to make sense within the confines of evidence.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2012, 09:43 AM
RE: Throwing out evidence
(09-02-2012 09:41 AM)lucradis Wrote:  Well... yeah.

I mean the YEC point of view is the most difficult to defend in this day and age. The only way to do it is to blatantly ignore the prove-able facts. Nothing else to it. Which boils down of course to lying to yourself and to your children.
That's what it is. Lying. I have no understanding of how these people think. It's completely opposite to how I think.
At least evolutionary creationists try to make sense within the confines of evidence.

YEC "science" is... I'm being as polite as I can be... completely laughable.

I still don't understand why YEC is so widely accepted among Christian communities.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2012, 09:48 AM
RE: Throwing out evidence
(09-02-2012 09:43 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 09:41 AM)lucradis Wrote:  Well... yeah.

I mean the YEC point of view is the most difficult to defend in this day and age. The only way to do it is to blatantly ignore the prove-able facts. Nothing else to it. Which boils down of course to lying to yourself and to your children.
That's what it is. Lying. I have no understanding of how these people think. It's completely opposite to how I think.
At least evolutionary creationists try to make sense within the confines of evidence.

YEC "science" is... I'm being as polite as I can be... completely laughable.

I still don't understand why YEC is so widely accepted among Christian communities.

My theory is that an ancient, natural universe is scary, and evolution is distasteful.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
09-02-2012, 09:48 AM
RE: Throwing out evidence
I have two guesses.

1: It's easier, and less frightening if what they were taught as children is true.

2: They have a very ... hard time.... with the learnin.
[Image: hillbilly+wedding.jpg]

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like lucradis's post
09-02-2012, 09:51 AM
RE: Throwing out evidence
(09-02-2012 09:48 AM)lucradis Wrote:  2: They have a very ... hard time.... with the learnin.
[Image: hillbilly+wedding.jpg]

Dude, that is COMPLETELY untrue. Rots are highly trainable and very, very smart. They are wonderful dogs.

You just hate them because of their bad rep.

[Image: vjp09.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like kingschosen's post
09-02-2012, 11:04 AM
 
RE: Throwing out evidence
(09-02-2012 09:43 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  I still don't understand why YEC is so widely accepted among Christian communities.


1. Christian Schools
2. Ignorance
3. Combine 1 & 2

When i hear the infamous words uttered of "I didn't come from no dadburn ape er monkey" is when i know the conversation is lost.
Its a celebration of ignorance & laziness. Because finding out the truth requires real research and hard work. Its easier to believe what Pastor Travis said on Sunday, cuz he's got a batphone connection to god.

PLUS, humans by in large are simply Uncomfortable with "Not Knowing". Which is why the 'god of the gaps' solution is so often used.
Many YEC see 'not knowing' as an assault on their intelligence and human experience, scientist and rationalist see it as a 'dare'.

As the polls show, there are more folks gladly willing to be Ignorant and Lazy, which is why polling for the YEC is so damn high.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Denicio's post
09-02-2012, 07:22 PM
RE: Throwing out evidence
(09-02-2012 11:04 AM)Denicio Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 09:43 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  I still don't understand why YEC is so widely accepted among Christian communities.


1. Christian Schools
2. Ignorance
3. Combine 1 & 2

When i hear the infamous words uttered of "I didn't come from no dadburn ape er monkey" is when i know the conversation is lost.
Its a celebration of ignorance & laziness. Because finding out the truth requires real research and hard work. Its easier to believe what Pastor Travis said on Sunday, cuz he's got a batphone connection to god.

PLUS, humans by in large are simply Uncomfortable with "Not Knowing". Which is why the 'god of the gaps' solution is so often used.
Many YEC see 'not knowing' as an assault on their intelligence and human experience, scientist and rationalist see it as a 'dare'.

As the polls show, there are more folks gladly willing to be Ignorant and Lazy, which is why polling for the YEC is so damn high.

I have seen YECs spend hours in posting, defending something they have cut and paste from a creationist site so it is more of an intellectual laziness with some of them. Perhaps the saddest part is that they often have not a clue about the actual science involved in the topic at hand. As you have stated some of this is due to a laziness but some is due to fear. I think many YECs are afraid that to actually objectively investigate the background material will cause doubt in their minds that the message they are supporting is not correct, and that it is wrong. That then would set up a crumbling of their faith in things YEC and threaten their belief in other aspects of their Christian "wordview" as they put it.

I think they find someone like myself more threatening than an atheist, that I can profess faith in Christ yet reject YEC "science"....
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2012, 11:14 PM
RE: Throwing out evidence
(09-02-2012 07:22 PM)Geode Wrote:  I think they find someone like myself more threatening than an atheist, that I can profess faith in Christ yet reject YEC "science"....

You're seen as being on the slippery slope by them. We see you as being still a significant distance up the garden path Wink

We're in the mud pool at the bottom of the garden, evolving Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
10-02-2012, 12:18 AM
RE: Throwing out evidence
(09-02-2012 11:14 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 07:22 PM)Geode Wrote:  I think they find someone like myself more threatening than an atheist, that I can profess faith in Christ yet reject YEC "science"....

You're seen as being on the slippery slope by them. We see you as being still a significant distance up the garden path Wink

We're in the mud pool at the bottom of the garden, evolving Tongue

Some months ago Ikester (an admin. at the "evolution fairytale" forum) used that exact term, "slippery slope" in talking about me and my faith. This past weekend he went past that and called me an atheist in denial. It is his viewpoint that Christians who think as I do are not really Christians at all. He asked how I was going to feel when facing Christ and explaining how I had dragged people down to hell with me. I replied that in my experience fundamentalist Christians who consider those who accept evolution damned to hell force a choice upon people that is not fair. Think YEC or be damned. Anybody who objectively looks at the evidence will come to the conclusion that the world is very old and that evolution has occurred.

That is why some YECs hate those who accept theistic evolution. It is not a way of thinking that is allowed in Christianity in their opinion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: