1,019
edits
Changes
→Creationist Scientists - Oxymoron
::::::I thought the implied argument was fairly obvious. TJ published utter nonsense about basic physics, ergo not a reliable source. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 11:06, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
::::::I thought the implied argument was fairly obvious. TJ published utter nonsense about basic physics, ergo not a reliable source. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 11:06, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::::Same for you. Do you care to back that slanderous claim up with substance? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:24, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::::Same for you. Do you care to back that slanderous claim up with substance? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:24, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
::::::::Gladly! Just let me dig out the appropriate articles and re-read them. I'll start a new section for it, so that it doesn't get lost here. Do you think it would be better here or on my Talk page? [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 11:28, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:'''How do we define "scientist" in a neutral way?''' It's not a degree, it's not a licensed profession... I think we have to fall back on self-description. If a creationist calls himself a scientist, he is... whether anyone likes it or not. But there might be a case for ''qualifying'' the description in the ''least obtrusive possible'' way. For example, if a person is described as a "creation scientist," the phrase should be footnoted with a reference to a biographical profile of the person in which they self-describe or are described as a "scientist."
:'''How do we define "scientist" in a neutral way?''' It's not a degree, it's not a licensed profession... I think we have to fall back on self-description. If a creationist calls himself a scientist, he is... whether anyone likes it or not. But there might be a case for ''qualifying'' the description in the ''least obtrusive possible'' way. For example, if a person is described as a "creation scientist," the phrase should be footnoted with a reference to a biographical profile of the person in which they self-describe or are described as a "scientist."
::::Evolution is not based on naturalism any more than any other scientific theory. Hence theistic evolution. Science is, of course, based in methodological naturalism, by definition. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 11:13, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
::::Evolution is not based on naturalism any more than any other scientific theory. Hence theistic evolution. Science is, of course, based in methodological naturalism, by definition. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 11:13, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::Theistic evolution owes virtually nothing to theism; it's naturalistic evolution with God tacked on. Now ''there's'' an oxymoron for you! Yes, it may be methodological naturalism, but the effect is the same—rule God out from consideration. Where's the scientific test for that? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:24, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::Theistic evolution owes virtually nothing to theism; it's naturalistic evolution with God tacked on. Now ''there's'' an oxymoron for you! Yes, it may be methodological naturalism, but the effect is the same—rule God out from consideration. Where's the scientific test for that? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:24, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
::::::You're making my point for me. Evolution is just evolution, regardless of whether or not one believes in God. Just like every other scientific theory. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 11:28, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
::I just don't see how you can use the term "scientist" when creationism involves no science and cannot be tested. I would also think that, for all the venom that is slung at science by the supporters of Creationism, that they wouldn't want that label attached to their cause.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 10:58, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
::I just don't see how you can use the term "scientist" when creationism involves no science and cannot be tested. I would also think that, for all the venom that is slung at science by the supporters of Creationism, that they wouldn't want that label attached to their cause.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 10:58, 26 March 2007 (EDT)