Board index ‹ Creation and Evolution

[jimwalton]

FOSSIL SHEDS LIGHT ON EARLY PRIMATES

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic ... y_primates

The report of a palm-sized primate from 55 million years ago is making headlines. (see also http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/06/ ... -relative/). I believe in good theology, but I also believe in good science, and I believe that truth does not contradict truth. I fear that in advancing an agenda (see http://www.creationproof.com/id24.html), some creationists are not being honest about the complexity of the fossil record and the attempts of scientists to explain how life forms from the past are related to life forms we see today. If we can't stand on the rock of TRUTH wherever we see it, we are not being honest and truthful. Our task is not to strike a position, and then accept all evidence that supports our position and ignore all evidence that challenges it. Our Christian TASK is to accept everything that is TRUE, and then formulate an honest position based on all of it.

What is your response?

1. I don't read science articles. My mind is made up.
2. I am angry because you are even talking about evolution.
3. I am torn because I agree, but please don't tell my church.
4. You are the devil and the devil is bad.

[Newbie]

You have a very interesting post on the 3rd choice concerning science, Christianity, and truth. You indicate that "our task is not to strike a position, and then accept all evidence that supports our position, and then ignore all evidence that challenges it." You also indicate that our task is to accept everything that is true....." I think this opens a very interesting debate. I just want you to know that obviously I greatly value science (especially good science). However, after publishing in neuroscience journals and sitting on NIH grant review panels, I can tell you that many of the well respected scientists accept only that which supports their theoretical assumptions. The goal for many of our scientists is to gain NIH funding so that they can continue to do their research, and in order to do this the competition has to be eliminated. This is sometimes done via limiting opposing interpretations of scientific data (some of which are very good and legitimate). Sometimes this is done via ridicule while on other occasions the use of propaganda. On other occasions, there are so many different ways to analyze date with stats but only one way is used. I have been in NIH meetings where this has happened, and I have seen it at my professional conferences. Of course, the popular media does not help with this any, as certain agendas are promoted. I could go on, but in the end, part of the problem with science is that it is viewed and interpreted by humans...who are clearly not perfect creatures. So, I am a healthy skeptic when it comes to extracting "truth" from science.... Naturally, there are some wonderful things that have come out of science (that God has blessed us with)....just as many have misused science to promote an agenda or receive fame, glory, whatever. I can count on one hand the number of times that I have seen a scientist get up at a professional conference express humility and say "I was wrong." This did happen last year (one of my previous mentors suggested that he may have led our neuroscience in the wrong direction because of miscalculations). He suggested some additional ways to avoid this problem in the future, and I was very impressed. That is not to say that all of the creation science research out there is great....again, humans are involved. At some point, faith must take place, and boy am I thankful for God's Holy Word. I know that you are too. Ok, well that about does it for now. Hope you have a great week!

[jimwalton]

Thanks, Erik, I agree with you. (I don't know why you didn't post where everyone could see it.) I have actually heard this from someone else, a Ph.D. in computer science and programming, who said much the same thing, if not close to identical. So I agree with you. Check out this link from Newsweek about 4 months ago:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2 ... dings.html

What does the common person DO with stuff like this? We're not professionals. We can't read all the journals (neither can the professionals). We can't flush it all for being untrustworthy, but we can't just bite on the hook either.

[Newbie]

Thanks, Jim. I saw this article that you linked to, and I think it is right on. The problem is, that many of our "top" scientists do not see themselves has having this problem. Part of this is inherent in our culture, and is part of the breeding. Those who are "humble" typically don't survive in academia (unfortunately). Part of the sin nature that we have. I'm hesitant to post this for everyone to see because of the "spies" that exist from academia....and the difficult conversations that would follow this. While I don't mind being ridiculed, my colleagues in academia are not really interested in thinking or listening to other viewpoints. Rather, they are interested in being hostile in part because of their fear. Through God's grace, I have survived in academia all the way to full professor. However, it is difficult being in a secular environment and trying to promote rationale thought. I have found that I am more effective sharing one-on-one to those who are interested. Indeed, there have been many private conversations in my office with students and faculty...which is where I think God has really used me. Those students who are searching for something tend to find me, and they know what I stand for because of word of mouth and a simple scripture reference on a rack that holds my business cards. As far as what to do regarding the state of science, I take every opportunity that I can to teach my students critical thinking skills with regard to how to evaluate science. A secular psychologist, Brian Ackerman, taught me this many years ago when I was an undergraduate, and I am thankful for that! I'll give it some more thought...back to you later.