Earth Magazine Article July 2011
Steve Newton of the National Center for Science Education has a very nice piece coming out in next month's issue of Earth. The article is entitled "Creationism Creeps into Conferences: Are creationists taking geologists for a ride?". The article discusses events that took place during the 2010 meeting of the Geological Society of America national meeting in Denver. The article focuses on a field trip led by young earth creationist 'scholars' to Garden of the Gods. It is even handed and compliments the leaders on a nice field trip (even if their thinly disguised motives are clear). It also mentions at the end, and exchange between myself and creationist Marcus Ross.
I don't know if Geological conferences are the only place these things happen, but creationists have been welcome at both AGU and GSA (our biggest conferences) for years and as far as I know there is no movement to limit their participation. I think that's a good thing since they could claim censorship (ala the now bankrupt "expelled"). I do think that when they choose to participate, they should also realize that they will be challenged if they speak from two sides of the coin. Marcus Ross can't make a living out of claiming that he has scientific evidence for a 6000 year old earth and then claim he also has good evidence for a millions of years old ammonite!
Anyway, it's a good read and the magazine does a nice job.
Cheers
Joe Meert
posted by Unknown @ 6:31 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
I went to the talks about evolution and creationism in education at the Denver meeting. Some disturbing statistics....
I like how the adjectives that you use throughout your blog refer to those with a different opinion than yours as quacks, freaks, idiots ie those quack scientists, those freaks I wouldn't expect this post to be approved. Unles of course you preface it with something like listen to thisnutjob, or freak or ....
Anon: Thanks for your comments. Not sure I called anyone a freak or idiots in my blog (but perhaps I did). If you can show me where, perhaps I can explain my context for using such a word. A 'quack' on the other hand is a useful term (derived from a dutch word) that describes someone trying to sell something useless (usually in a loud voice). YE-creationism has proven itself to be economically useless and so the term 'quack' is apropos. If you can show me where young earth geology has proven fruitful, perhaps I'll change my mind. Just because you're easily influenced by ye-creationist ideas doesn't make them any less quacky. Thanks for reading.
Post a Comment
<< Home