Conspiracy Road Trip: Creationism
On the FIRST stop, I wrote no comment. That is because I had no idea how to explain Horse Shoe Bend myself. I took Tas Walker on CMI to help out, and here is THAT link:
CMI : Horse Shoe Bend, Arizona
Carved by the receding waters of Noah’s Flood
by Tas Walker, Published: 18 September 2012
17:17 I know Jerry Coyne somewhat from his blog and he is certainly a COMMITTED secularist. When he claims the Creationists are committed and he is not, he lies.
Here is his blog:
Why Evolution is True
Huge minus, he is evolutionist and fanatic enough to have banned my from commenting, huge plus, the Hili dialogues - a cat and sometimes a dog speaking Polish with translation. Here are three occasions when my arguing has involved him, which can be seen as a huge plus (from my p o v, since I enjoy arguing) or a huge minus (if you really hate what I write):
- 1 New blog on the kid : Science and Religion - Citing Two of my Opponents
- 2 [item:] Blogosphere in the Feast of Sts Simon and Jude 2015
- 3 [item:] Homeschooling is Usually Not University Level AND Graphic Porn Does More than Expose to Ideas
He's a pretty dedicated evolutionist.
18:13 Coyne says "morality does not come from God" (according to Evolution, but that is what he believes in as "science") and says it is hard for us to accept.
Well, claiming universally valid morality issued from evolution is a theoretical impossibility to him, and renouncing claims of morality being universally moral, at least it is hard to most evolutionists, not sure about him. See Wettstein's attitude:
Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... against Wettstein on Abortion and Sodomy, Chanaaneans and Old Age Pensions
25:28 Wonder if Andrew Maxwell could as successfully get evolutionists to dig for Triassic straight below Jurassic or for Permian straight below Triassic in Karoo?
If these were different epochs, surely some place you would find a Permian layer below a Triassic one, palaeontologically speaking and not just by default geological labelling?
The professionals of Karoo seemed less than eager:
Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : Contacting Karoo about superposition of layers and fossils
26:26 Hypothesis on why not finding human fossils along dino ones.
- A) Most basically. Where T Rexes or wild Brontosaurs abound, you don't settle if you have any sense. And since man lived to 900 years sometimes pre-Flood, by the time of the Flood (when fossils are mostly from) man and dino had separate habitats.
- B) Some dinos are actually so little documented, that they theoretically also could be human/nephelim fossils. Here is my mirror for a page on the now lost site palaeocritti. I added own comments in square brackets or signalled as own:
Palaeocritti Blog : Uberabatitan ribeiroi
He mentioned pterodactyls and condors. But solution is basically same there : different habitats.
26:59 To squish His creative power into a ... 6000 year [literal?] framework ... false point. It would be a true one, if creating a world or any number of worlds could in any way exhaust God's creative power - or if God was suff ering from an irrepressible itch to use it through "millions of years" before or after His creating time. But read a little St Thomas Aquinas! If God had been creating world after world, allowing each an infinite time, it would still not in any way exhaust His creativity. And the "outside" the finite creation, either locally or temporally, is not there to bother God - God is rather Himself outside as well as inside creation. Saint Juliana of Norwich had a vision of Christ as God the Creator. In that vision, He held all He had created in his hand, and it was not bigger than a nut (obviously in that vision compared to His human form). So, God's creative power is not squished into what He has chosen to actually create.
27:10 ... is to tarnish His glory? Er, no. Denying His truthfulness is tarnishing His glory, as far as we speak of His external glory among us.
[debate under these two, upcoming]
28:19, sth before. "But you interpret science whi chever way it fits" - Andrew Maxwell, are you treating science as an absolute we have to bow down to?
29:09 "the point of the show is for you" Oh, Andrew Maxwell sees fit to treat creationists as some half looney guys whom one should try to treat ... never mind the debate or all that! Well, I'd say it was easier for Coyne and Prothero and that other guy to play Andrew Maxwell's game than taking on Kent Hovind or Tas Walker or Woodmorappe in oral debate - or me in written one. Via internet.
31:43 Chimps can cry, but they don't have tears like us. They also have emotions, but cannot signal them by the eyes that well, since they have nearly no visible sclera. They have opposable thumbs, but apparently don't do crafts either. And if they are taught any kind of language to communicate with keepers, the least impressed with it are linguists who have a hunch of what grammar or a human language is.
And at age seven, the chimps is behaving i n a way which would get a seven year old boy spanked - or given psychiatric treatment. (31:54)
39:07 Phil suspected of being a bully by Andrew Maxwell? More like, he is (rather consciously) setting a standard of not being concessionist. Simply by not being so himself.
39:22 If A M or director is bullying or not depends very much on what we do not see. Some are more likely to complain than others.
39:30 Taking leadership over the group? Or receiving it? Two different things.
43:00 "I always thought Adam and Eve weren't meant to be taken literally" - and who the Hell gave you that impression, Andrew? I suppose you won't admit it was the serpent himself, so who?
By 47:00 looking back a bit. Something has been edited out. Oldest dated fossils from a valley in Ethiopia are NOT carbon dated. If you date anything to "4 million years ago", it is not by carbon 14. Can I guess that the valley in Ethiopia is called Olduvai? Here goes ... oh, sorry, it is Laetoli in Tanzania:
Creation vs. Evolution : Isn't There a Geological Column in Laetoli, and Aren't the Footprints Proof of Human Ancestors?
52:03 Question in two parts : do the bacteria there have cell walls made by phospholipids? Are phospholipids likely to be produced without previous life in such exact places?
53:42 "that for hundreds of years scientists have concocted absolute nonsense, just so we can do as we please" I do not share Phil's analysis of motive on the level of every scientist. But those who are honest have been formed an an environment which is not. Check out Dawkins, Coyne, Salman Rushdie, AronRa and a few more like those. And of course P Z Myers. They do have a hatchet to grind with Christianity and with Christian morality. And some of them are natural scientists, of above all except Salman, as far as I know.
[comment debate under this one]
55:01 Abdul has been the voice of reason throughout ... no, we could never ever in a thousand years have guessed a Muslim would think of himself as that, could we?
55:07 And Abdul thinks Christianity didn't do too well? Well, who has been teaching him its history?
55:14 Islam absolutely unscathed? Yea, in this roadtrip. Unless being too conceited is a bit ... scathed.
55:52 Really pleased JoJo has taken a step to his position ... right. Was she honestly Young Earth Creationist at the start? Perhaps. "I don't want to be blinkered" Right, we have all heard, time after time, about Fundies being blinkered. I wonder if the five scientists would accept a similar roadtrip with Creation Scientists hosting - or if they are too blinkered.