Up Coming TV

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Roger Stanyard » Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:11 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:Email exchange with Tas Walker late this evening:


Tas Walker claims: "The gushing comments from your closed-minded, unscientific, readers
(one of whom has just mentioned the BBC programme - which clearly
showed that a catastrophic flood would not create such a massive
meander) of course failed to ask you this obvious question.
If Jesus wants me to lie for him about science he can take a running
jump."


Humm, as far as I am aware, virtually all the members of this forum have a degree in science (I'm an exception) and there are several hundred of them.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:42 am

Roger Stanyard wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:Email exchange with Tas Walker late this evening:


Tas Walker claims: "The gushing comments from your closed-minded, unscientific, readers
(one of whom has just mentioned the BBC programme - which clearly
showed that a catastrophic flood would not create such a massive
meander) of course failed to ask you this obvious question.
If Jesus wants me to lie for him about science he can take a running
jump."


Humm, as far as I am aware, virtually all the members of this forum have a degree in science (I'm an exception) and there are several hundred of them.


Roger: So am I

However, I worked alongside people who had degrees. Within industry an H.N.C/H.N.D in chemistry along with several years experiance was treated as the same as a degree in chemistry. For example, in the laboratory I worked in two of us had HNC's, and two had degrees. I think the same thing applied to engineers within Prenier Power as well.

With 30 years experience of working in science, I reckon I'm far more scientifically literate than Robinson. I've spent a fair number of years actually studying sciernce, and it's definitely not the same as rhyming off YEC claims from creationist websites like AiG and CMI.

Robinson is also listed as an associate speaker with C.M.I. He was a full time employee for a while.

He also appeared on the big question a year or so ago re. the free schools teaching creationism, along with McIntosh and Baker (who was in the audience). The recording is available on Youtube.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4350
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Michael » Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:33 am

Peter Henderson wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:Email exchange with Tas Walker late this evening:


Tas Walker claims: "The gushing comments from your closed-minded, unscientific, readers
(one of whom has just mentioned the BBC programme - which clearly
showed that a catastrophic flood would not create such a massive
meander) of course failed to ask you this obvious question.
If Jesus wants me to lie for him about science he can take a running
jump."


Humm, as far as I am aware, virtually all the members of this forum have a degree in science (I'm an exception) and there are several hundred of them.


Roger: So am I

However, I worked alongside people who had degrees. Within industry an H.N.C/H.N.D in chemistry along with several years experiance was treated as the same as a degree in chemistry. For example, in the laboratory I worked in two of us had HNC's, and two had degrees. I think the same thing applied to engineers within Prenier Power as well.

With 30 years experience of working in science, I reckon I'm far more scientifically literate than Robinson. I've spent a fair number of years actually studying sciernce, and it's definitely not the same as rhyming off YEC claims from creationist websites like AiG and CMI.

Robinson is also listed as an associate speaker with C.M.I. He was a full time employee for a while.

He also appeared on the big question a year or so ago re. the free schools teaching creationism, along with McIntosh and Baker (who was in the audience). The recording is available on Youtube.



Peter, you have a good grasp of all the issues as do Ashley and Roger - who don't have degrees in science. I am good at testing BS whether or not the BSer has a BSc :D
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:57 am

Thanks Michael

If I had the time, I'd finish off my O.U. degree. I currently have 180 C.A.T points so I'm half way there. I'd love to have a go at their geology course, S276. Both S 268 and S281 contained quite a lot of geology, as did S 283.

I really regret not doing Grad. R.I.C many years ago after I'd completed my H.N.C., which was a stupid deecision. Had I successfully completed it I'd have had the equivalent of an honors degree.

Still, at that level Chemistry is really quite advanced. My line manager tried to do L.R.I.C. but found it was too difficult (maybe it was to do with it being part time study) and gave up in the end.

As I have often said, I consider myself fortunate to have learned at least some geology under Herbie Black. That in itself has redered me largely immune to YEC claims.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4350
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Roger Stanyard » Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:16 am

Michael wrote:Peter, you have a good grasp of all the issues as do Ashley and Roger - who don't have degrees in science. I am good at testing BS whether or not the BSer has a BSc :D


I've long said that it doesn't take a background in science to see straight through "creation science" as creation science isn't even remotely science. It's a religious position. I have US court case after court case to back me up on this.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby psiloiordinary » Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:19 am

He was on Sunday Morning Live, being aggressive and interrupting people.
User avatar
psiloiordinary
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:03 am
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Roger Stanyard » Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:44 am

psiloiordinary wrote:He was on Sunday Morning Live, being aggressive and interrupting people.


I suspect he is his own worst enemy having seen both that programme and the one yesterday. He had one girl in tears as she refused to accept all he believed.

No doubt his bullying is why he is not a full time creationist. Many people avoid or walk away from that sort of thing.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Michael » Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:33 pm

Roger Stanyard wrote:
psiloiordinary wrote:He was on Sunday Morning Live, being aggressive and interrupting people.


I suspect he is his own worst enemy having seen both that programme and the one yesterday. He had one girl in tears as she refused to accept all he believed.

No doubt his bullying is why he is not a full time creationist. Many people avoid or walk away from that sort of thing.



Surely bullying is a prime requirement for a creationist job
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Roger Stanyard » Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:19 pm

Michael wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:
psiloiordinary wrote:He was on Sunday Morning Live, being aggressive and interrupting people.


I suspect he is his own worst enemy having seen both that programme and the one yesterday. He had one girl in tears as she refused to accept all he believed.

No doubt his bullying is why he is not a full time creationist. Many people avoid or walk away from that sort of thing.



Surely bullying is a prime requirement for a creationist job


Yer, but when the collection plate goes round after his presentations one wonders how many rupees, old washers, dimes or whatever get donated.

The problem I guess is that in NI everyone knows each other so they are also well warned before he turns up.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby cathy » Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:55 pm

Surely bullying is a prime requirement for a creationist job

It is THE prime requirement for the job. Whether it is gentle coercion style bullying of the 'you're not quite a good enough christian unless you believe this' or 'it is important' or just the being pleased and more accepting of those that do agree whilst being cooler and harrying those that don't - targetted at those that are vulnerable and want to continue believing. Thru to the more obvious yelling and shouting at people of CMI or AiG.

It has to be. Nobody with half a brain really would want or deliberately choose to reject all known science unless extreme pressure was put upon them. Subtle or otherwise. And some people do desperately need to feel like they belong whatever the cost to their reason.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:11 pm

I've now taken a much closer look at this: http://creation.com/horse-shoe-bend-arizona
He seems to be claiming the erosion channel which Figure 3 appears to show was caused by the 'recessive' stage of Noah's Flood.
But what about the Colorado River and the massively deep canyon it flows through - including at the dramatic meander known as Horseshoe Bend? Is Mr Walker suggesting that a 'draining flood' or newly-formed river, even if much deeper than today's river, could carve out such a massive formation in just months?
Well, we get this from him: "Note that the plateau would have been undulating rather than flat, similar to the uneven surface on the beach when the tide goes out. The water that continued to flow, draining the ponded areas upstream (such as Lake Powell and beyond), would have flowed along the lowest parts of the landscape, following the winding, meandering route that we now see". On what grounds does he say the plateau would have been 'undulating' (and did the Colorado River exist 'pre-Flood and if so did it already follow a meandering course through a deep canyon)?
According to Wikipedia, for what it's worth, a 'water gap' (which Walker and his colleagues attribute to the Flood) "is usually an indication of a river that is older than the current topography". That is hardly helpful to young Earthers!

Most of those commenting under the article appear to have a dim view of science.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:48 pm

I've attempted to email the link to this thread to Professor Donald Prothero, Occidental College, and the Skeptics Society.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:45 pm

Apparently Professor Prothero is planning to write a blog post once he has been able to view the BBC film:
http://www.donaldprothero.com/
http://www.donaldprothero.com/Blogs.html
http://www.skepticblog.org/author/prothero/
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8879
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby marcsurtees » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:16 pm

cathy wrote:It has to be. Nobody with half a brain really would want or deliberately choose to reject all known science unless extreme pressure was put upon them. Subtle or otherwise. And some people do desperately need to feel like they belong whatever the cost to their reason.

Which is why it's good that we don't have to reject all science :!:
Marc
_______________________________________________________
"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing
— they believe in anything." (commonly attributed to) G.K. Chesterton
marcsurtees
 
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 7:05 pm
Location: Edinburgh

Re: Up Coming TV

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:20 pm

marcsurtees wrote:
cathy wrote:It has to be. Nobody with half a brain really would want or deliberately choose to reject all known science unless extreme pressure was put upon them. Subtle or otherwise. And some people do desperately need to feel like they belong whatever the cost to their reason.

Which is why it's good that we don't have to reject all science :!:


I beg to differ:

http://creation.com/about-us#what_we_believe

6.By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4350
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

PreviousNext

Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 6 guests

cron