tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post4917834424226963896..comments2024-03-22T15:15:09.943-04:00Comments on Lionel Deimel’s Web Log: An Interesting Argument against CreationismLionel Deimelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08363018512775944659noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-41733331975470060842014-04-04T16:31:29.501-04:002014-04-04T16:31:29.501-04:00Here is a neat little explanation of all the ways ...Here is a neat little explanation of all the ways young-earth creationists use to insulate themselves against intrusive knowledge. It isn't convincing stuff, but it isn't meant to convince you the scientist and rational-person, it is meant to shore up their own convictions on which they already have a lot riding.<br />http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2014/04/03/young-earth-creationism-and-the-problem-of-telescopes-part-2/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-2211654446243600052014-04-01T11:28:27.930-04:002014-04-01T11:28:27.930-04:00I have watched only the first and third shows so f...I have watched only the first and third shows so far (I also find the commercials annoying). The program is visually stunning and interesting in many ways, but in retrospect after the first show I had to agree with <a href="http://jintoku.blogspot.com/2014/03/chaotic-cosmos.html" rel="nofollow">Tobias Haller</a> that the over-long section on Giordano Bruno was misguided. The third episode further made me feel that Tyson is a little too preoccupied with showing how religion has got it wrong and science has got it right. There doesn't seem to be any acknowledgement that many people--including many scientists--have religious beliefs that complement, not contradict, modern scientific understanding. <br /><br />As to the idea that the vast distance of the stars is the best refutation for the creationists belief in a 6600 year old earth... While a valid point, I don't think it is a very effective approach, simply because it relies on scientific knowledge that is not at all obvious to the scientifically illiterate. Simply looking at the night sky gives no direct hint that the stars are thousands or billions of light years distant. You need to know about the expanding universe and red-shifted starlight to know that the stars are vastly distant. I would think that the fact that we can find marine fossils in geologic strata that are highly visible and well above sea level is a much more obvious clue as to the ancient age of the earth. Yeah, the literalists can give us weird ideas about God planting them there to test our faith, but the scientific explanation obviously makes much more sense than that. Remarks I have heard from some of my literalist relatives show that one thing that gives them real difficulty is: dinosaurs! And you can go look at them yourself right here in Pittsburgh.<br /><br />Bill GhristAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-16653465910193626752014-03-31T17:41:46.198-04:002014-03-31T17:41:46.198-04:00I agree that the commercials are numerous and intr...I agree that the commercials are numerous and intrusive. It’s too bad the producers didn’t find funding to allow the series to be shown (on Fox or elsewhere) without commercials.Lionel Deimelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08363018512775944659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-42960680619788870472014-03-31T17:25:54.100-04:002014-03-31T17:25:54.100-04:00I tried to watch but between the commercials and s...I tried to watch but between the commercials and superficial nature of the program I got frustrated and turned it off.PseudoPiskiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12070541512355253553noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-64977069856096577942014-03-31T11:50:40.839-04:002014-03-31T11:50:40.839-04:00Unfortunately the same breed of very committed cre...Unfortunately the same breed of very committed creationist who believes that God made fossils then put them in the ground to test the faith of modern believers would simply say that God started the supposedly far-away light much closer to Earth making it appear to be much older/from further away than it could be. Creationists don't believe in the development of the universe in any way, so they don't believe in light taking all this time to slowly reach us - they believe rather that when God make the heavens that all the stars that are visible now were visible then, instantly. The speed of light is a product of maintenance of the universe, not creation. I'm not suggesting this is reasonable, I'm just telling you why this won't convince anyone who's committed to creationism. They are remarkably good at shutting out the facts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com