Young Earth Creationists

[TClaeys]

I need help.

(And I had to put this in the conspiracy thread cuz I think that is where it belongs.)

Well, actually I don't need help, someone else does. More important many, many people need help.

I've come to find out that my boss is a Young Earth Creationist. Here is the hard part. He really is great guy(like that is going to go far). He is genuine, compassionate, and reasonable(seemingly). I feel bad even writing this, but am unsure of how to act and respond.

It seems Darwin has created quite a monstrosity. And science had even further enraged the discussion, with truth no doubt. Anyway my boss thinks we lived with the dinosaurs, evolution is a hoax, Neanderthals are a hoax, all of our dating techniques are wrong, the fossil record is misrepresented, we can't find a transitional form, the Grand Canyon was formed in a thousand years or so, Continental drift is a hoax, and so on. And on, and on.


So to humor him, I've looked into the arguments, and come to find, they are abysmal. They are embarrassing. Now, to my understanding lots, thousands, tens of thousands, and more believe this rubbish. Can you believe that recent Roper polls suggest that 40-50% of the people (not sure sample size, etc) believe that the Bible is the literal word of GOD ??!!

WHY?? (It's sort of a rhetorical question)

Despite what you believe, whether atheist or theist, what can you make of this situation? I'll have to say at this point I think that a god does exist. There are so many questions that beg a creator in whatever form you like. I suppose as many questions beg a creator as they beg no creator. It depends on multiple factors and arguments. I'm not a christian or of any denomination, but I think that there are some valid reasons to believe in a creator.

But this????

It is this type of philosphy that continues to wedge the compatibility of faith and science. And I'm not saying that we can prove or know of an apparent god because of science, but that the two do not have to be incompatible. It just requires an understanding of what we know like evolution, big bang, geology, cosmology, DNA, to be in complete awe of what we observe.

I don't see how our understanding of our world precludes the existence of god (for lack of a better term, maybe "force" would be better) Yet people like the YEC are incredibly frightened by worlds colliding.

I just have a hard time with seemingly reasonable people discounting or completely disregarding the brilliant works of scientists in the past and present. What is it about literal belief in the Bible that attracts so many??

Thanks, I just had to get this off my chest. While on one hand I would like to completely wreck every argument put forth I don't know if it is in my interest to do so. He doesn't seem to be harming anyone, so far as I can tell. He is adamant about it, but not in a particularly filibuster manner. Yet he would like to discuss such matters.

This puts me in a paradox. I shouldn't have the discussion because it may enrage him(someone I may need a reference from) and break down his own paradigm into a sensible one(unlikely). I should have the discussion because I'm right and the truth, as far as we understand it, should be known and misperceptions should be cleared up. This is because the children of such families grow up with a disadvantage that will hinder their potential as intelligent, reasonable, objective human beings.

Any comments or advice??

BTW I'm nearly through a book right now that is perhaps the most sensibly framed book in describing the potential compatibility between science and religion. It really strikes me as insightful and is written by the former head of the Human Genome Project , Francis Collins. It's called "The Language of God" and is a great book in my opinion.

 

[CapnG]

Any comments or advice??

Yeah... don't waste your time. I'm assuming your boss is over the age of 40 so it's a solid bet he's stuck in his ways. My roomate's girlfriend in college was raised pure Bible baptist (6000 year old earth, dinosaurs in eden, etc) and it took us a good year or so to de-program her. Mind you, she turned into a complete skank/lush by graduation, so it's possible we went too far...

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Any comments or advice??

Yeah... don't waste your time. I'm assuming your boss is over the age of 40 so it's a solid bet he's stuck in his ways. My roomate's girlfriend in college was raised pure Bible baptist (6000 year old earth, dinosaurs in eden, etc) and it took us a good year or so to de-program her. Mind you, she turned into a complete skank/lush by graduation, so it's possible we went too far...

Not if she was hot.

lol, funny story above btw.

 

[ArizonaWill]

My advice is to focus on your own reactions. You noted in your post that you have a "hard time" with his views. So to me, any work that you might undertake entails dealing with your own reactions. Now, I agree that Creationism is absurd and childish from any intellectual standpoint, but it must be true to people who have a religious fundamentalist foundation for their faith. To such people, spirituality is a by-the-numbers sort of thing, and every word in the Bible is literal, since getting into the mystic and metaphysical underpinnings, as well as the historical context and underlying prejudice and superstitions of the authors, is way beyond these folks. They want a simple theology, no matter how convoluted it may be to the rest of us.

Your task is not to transform your boss or anyone else in the world. Your task is to learn to accept that the world contains such people, and that you need to let go of your emotional reaction to them.

Ask yourself, would I rather be RIGHT (in this issue) or just feel PEACEFUL. To feel right, you'd have to somehow totally transform your boss's religious beliefs. That will not happen. You do not really have that power. Plus, your relationship is not equal. He is not just a peer or a friend, he is in authority over you on the job. So this relationship is not equal by definition, and he could consider it insubordination for you to start refuting his beliefs. On the other hand, it is not his place to push his religious agenda on his subordinates.

So, perhaps you can politely let him know that you do not wish to discuss religion. Period. No more or less. No rancor or words that will upset him. Just politely decline to get sucked into the issue.

Then deal with your own reactions. Wouldn't you prefer peace, to just let go of your ego's desire to set this guy right? Realize that you cannot do so, and it is causing you pain or irritation at some emotional level. Let go of that need, and just accept the guy as he is. Make your own PEACE the priority on the job, not conversion. Everyone is running around trying to convert each other. That's one reason there is so much dis-ease around.

Make sense?

 

[TClaeys]

Your task is not to transform your boss or anyone else in the world. Your task is to learn to accept that the world contains such people, and that you need to let go of your emotional reaction to them.

Point well taken and I've thought about this even before your post as well. Lets say I was to convince him that evolution was real and the underpinnings of our own existence was based on it. What would that really do, but shake the foundations of his livelihood. And perhaps destroy him and his religious convictions. Would I feel good about this?? I don't think so. It may serve no point whatsoever except to prove my point. And I'm not really out to get anyone. I don't know that I would benefit in any way.

It is, however, quite difficult to remain emotionally detached in such circumstances. He does bring it up occasionally and we've breifly discussed some things. But as a former science teacher I have bigger problems with such dogmatic approaches. This being that the children of such familes are not only at a intellectual disadvantage, but it could be argued that this is indeed a form of child abuse. Of course that is strong language, but the case could be adequetely defended.

I've had students who refuse to even look at science as way to understand their world. How my role changes when I encounter such people. The kids I'm suppose to teach. The ones I'm suppose to inspire and help construct their intellectual framework for life. This is where the true unjustice is. And this is where I find it hard to be emotionally detached.

But in response to your post, I have to agree with you. I can't be my sole responsibility to change the world. I have to be at peace with myself, my own beliefs, and the reality that the world contains many types of people that I happen to disagree with. I suppose its just more difficult in practice than in theory. Appreciate the comments, thanks.

 

[ArizonaWill]

Just as an addendum: my sister is a classic Liberal, and my dad is a reactionary right wing conservative. For many years my sister has agonized over trying to change my dad's political outlook on life in the USA. The result has been a lot of tension and yelling at family gatherings, and some bitterness on both sides. He remains a conservative and she remains a liberal.

I asked her several times why it is so important to her that she change dad's political views. She also cannot tolerate that there are people in the world (takes it very personally) who have what she considers conservative views. She cannot just let it be, and it causes her great tension just about every single day.

Now if my dad was a billionnaire, or a captain in industry or had great political and economic power, perhaps I could understand her desire to change his views (since he has the potential to do great harm if he has great power at his disposal). In actuality, my dad is 96 years old, lives in a nursing home on a small pension and social security. There is really no logical reason for arguing with him, since he has no influence on anything, as he slowly goes blind and sits on a bedpan!

I understand your concern about the state of America's children, and I agree that there are many factors dumbing down children. They are fantastic at Playstation games of violence, but don't know anything about the arts and sciences. But you do have to take care of yourself. You don't want to end up with a cancer or intestinal problems or something like that from all the tension of not accepting the world as it is. If you get a government grant for $2 million bucks, maybe you could start a program to promote science and logical classes. But you are a bit like that English king who commanded the ocean tide to recede. It didn't.

I commiserate with you. One time while channel surfing I stopped on the Pat Robertson 700 Club. There was a so-called scientist there from Kentucky, where there is now a Creationist museum. He was standing next to a dinasaur that had a man on its back (like Dinotopia!). He said to Pat "We must teach our children that science is evil! Science is lies! Science is of the devil."

Ironically, the 21st century technology (thanks, Science!) was being used to beam this message across North America, probably using satellites.

 

[CapnG]

This being that the children of such familes are not only at a intellectual disadvantage, but it could be argued that this is indeed a form of child abuse. Of course that is strong language, but the case could be adequetely defended.

Don't worry, if they make it to higher education and run into people like me and my friends we'll straighten them out (if we can). The older generation is a lost cause however.

 

[TClaeys]

Thanks Capn. And if conversion results in promiscuity and drunkeness, then I think I may have found my life mission. Oops, but I'm married.

Wait a minute,.... now I'm having a real epiphany.

 

[CapnG]

Wait a minute,.... now I'm having a real epiphany.

I hear they make a cream for that now...

In the ongoing irony that claims "science is the devil" I've noticed with disturbing regularity that when I search for UFO related videos on Youtube I often find the same anti-reason, bible thumping silliness posted again and again, usually linking back to one source, a site called saintbrigitta.com.

The sheer dedication these people have to using technology to prove how evil and just plain wrong the science on which that technology is based is, frankly, STAGGERING. Here's a sample bit of nonsense:

[Youtube]aWW9exqSJuk[/Youtube]

See if you can make it past the first 15 seconds without either bursting into laughter or seething with rage. I certainly couldn't.

The lesson here: you cannot reason with people who have abandoned reason altogether.

 

[Capnkumquat]

As a Christian it disturbs me to no end when people take the bible, a book of philosophy and religion and turn it into a major treatise on particle physics, earth science, and deep space astrophysics.

Anyone who takes the book of Genesis as absolute history is delusional. Genesis, like several other books of the bible are considered allegorical ecclesiastical poetry/fiction. Genesis is meant to express wonder at the world, the cosmos, the division of man from the animals, the beginings of morality, the growth of civilization, and to show awe at the power of an unimaginably powerful God.

To sum up....
Bible useful for religion and philosophy
Bible not useful for engineering, paleontology, particle physics, and cooking.

 

[UBERDOINK]

I have to say this is a very bigoted thread. Why should it matter what he wants to believe?

How does it harm you? or anyone? It sounds like he's a good person, isn't that what should matter?

Using your rational people could say that children raised in homes that believe Gia the Earth, who mother controls their spirit guides are being turned into brain dead idiots. (they are, but that's not the point.

We live in a FREE country, where people can BELIEVE however they want. We aren't NAZI's that must force people to line up to our personal beliefs.

 

[CapnG]

This thread is scary in the way it portrays those that they don't agree with. Where is the tolerance for others?

I don't suffer fools lightly. Idiots, even less. I have zero tolerence for voluntary ignorance on this scale.

And if you think this thread represents some sort of facist imposition, then you may want to look at how these poor, oppressed folks speak of those of us on their side of the debate. Here's a hint: we're all evil servant's of Satan and will be torn asunder by the wrath of a righteous god on judgement day.

We advocate their education, they advocate our destruction (in a hands-off, "don't blame us" kinda way). See the difference? If not you may need glasses...

Final point; we call them "beliefs" becausae they're not FACTS. And to paraphrase Lewis Black, facts form a vital thread in the greater tapestry that I like to call REALITY. Beliefs are like stains on that tapestry.

 

[UBERDOINK]

We advocate their education, they advocate our destruction (in a hands-off, "don't blame us" kinda way). See the difference? If not you may need glasses...

Please show me some statements of people calling for destruction again? Don't they just think you are also mislead?

Final point; we call them "beliefs" because they're not FACTS.

The more we learn the more we realize that there are few, if any real FACTS. There are ton's of beliefs, like all the beliefs your post espouses for example.

You are free to believe what ever you want. Why aren't they?

And yes Totalitarianism in any form is Fascist.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

We live in a FREE country

What country is that?

 

[CapnG]

Please show me some statements of people calling for destruction again?

The more ferverant amongst them pray god will strike us down for our blasphemies (things like logic and reason and critical thinking). Others sit smugly back, confident in the "knowledge" that we will all be cast into the lake of fire on judgement day. Of course we can be "saved" by agreeing to their preposterous worldview but other than that they all look forward to the day when we're not around.

The more we learn the more we realize that there are few, if any real FACTS.

Bzzzt! Wrong but thanks for playing our game! Existence is existence. Even if the facts we currently hold true now turn out to be false later, ultimately there must be a final truth to all things; those final truths are FACTS. That's what science is: a slow march towards those ultimate facts. In the context of this discussion however (on a scale of fact to fairy-tale) the reality I espouse is much closer to the ultimate fact end.

You are free to believe what ever you want. Why aren't they?

You're missing the point (per ususal, it seems). A belief is an idea which cannot be tested. If they want to believe in god and the more esoteric aspects of the bible that's fine. But if they want to challenge science as a "belief" system then they must be prepared to back it up with solid evidence. They aren't. Science has labs, lasers, computers and (most importantly) are responsibility to be accountable to itself. The Bible is a book and a really old one at that, written by at least a dozen different authors over a span of centuries. It is NOT an empirical resource. It's not even a coherent one. If you must label science as merely an alternate "belief system" then it is a vastly superior system.

And yes Totalitarianism in any form is Fascist.

Except when they implement it on their own terms (like that mormon mess), then it's actually a belief to which they're entitled, right?

 

[TClaeys]

I have to say this is a very bigoted thread. Why should it matter what he wants to believe?

How does it harm you? or anyone? It sounds like he's a good person, isn't that what should matter?

I suppose it doesn't matter what someone believes. People believe in fairies,.... so what? I don't have a problem with that specifically. Probably what I believe is bunk as well. Here is where my problem lies:

First off, I have backed off bringing the topic up. I think it may be more important to realize the type of world we live in and the type of people that reside here and accept the fact that people are often times delusional. Still, doesn't hurt me right?

But, ... when I am engaged in this conversation, or prompted, I have to speak my peace. I am confronted with a man who puts forth ridiculous arguments to try and fit his worldview. And as science as my guide, I begin to grudgingly tell him that, well, NO the universe is actually very big and old(older than 6,000 years). Antarctica has had past life because the continents move. Neanderthals did exist. We do have a tailbone. Evolution is supported by numerous observations. We did not live and ride dinosaurs. And so on and on and on.

This has been a bit hard on me because I felt a need to debunk and clarify the true situation. But as I've found through discussion and comments by varying people(including this thread) I don't really need to do this (unless I'm forced in a position to defend myself). He is a good guy, delusional or not. So, you live and learn and come to some form of acceptance of these people. But,...

I am a past educator and this presents problems for me. This is because I think, and this may be harsh, that these belief systems foster an ignorance for education. And shouldn't a child be allowed to learn truth?? In my opinion some of these people are mentally abusing their children. That is an utterly harsh view of this, but when you restrict a child from their potential by throwing them into fairytale land I don't know what else to call it.

It sort of reminds me of a quote by Galileo:
“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”

And by foregoing their use, we constrict the minds of our youth. And that just isn't right. So there is harm being done.

But I hear what you are saying UBERDOINK. I've found some ways to deal with it and while I try to stay clear of the conversation, I do have a right to defend science and rational thinking when provoked. In the meantime I just grin and bear it and live with the understanding that our world is full of strange people. (And I'm sure I'm one of them as well)

 

[UBERDOINK]

I've found some ways to deal with it and while I try to stay clear of the conversation, I do have a right to defend science and rational thinking when provoked. In the meantime I just grin and bear it and live with the understanding that our world is full of strange people. (And I'm sure I'm one of them as well)

That's the whole point I think. We all have belief systems, but we must tolerate others, not agree, but say, politely learn to dissagree.

Your right, as of right now, it looks like science is right, but hey, 500 years ago science was completely different, and people would be arguing that we were all balanced on the back of an elephant, standing on a turtle... and would show you their "science" to prove it.

I guess what I'm saying, is the more we learn, the less we realize we truly "know", and the more we understand we "believe" a very many things.

 

[CapnG]

I guess what I'm saying, is the more we learn, the less we realize we truly "know", and the more we understand we "believe" a very many things.

That's an absurd supposition and completely contrary to the elephant/turtle example you just gave (someone's been reading Prachett I see ). We always know more tomorrow than we do today.

 

[UBERDOINK]

We always know more tomorrow than we do today.

Historically that's not the case, we loose information, from the Roman era we went into chaos and the dark ages loosing ton's of advancements.

Also because it seems relative, science is full of lies and fraud and bias's as which suppresses truth to an amazing degree. We can't put "faith" in science unless we realize that it is, in fact "faith"

1999 Accountability in Research
http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/99air/

Abstract

Research data can be suppressed in various ways, including organizational secrecy, defamation law and refusal to reply to queries. In a broader sense, methods of suppression include pressures not to do research in the first place and attacks on scientists who produce unwelcome data. The context of this sort of suppression includes individual self-interest, vested interests, and paradigms. Suppressing research data can be either compatible with or contrary to accountability, depending on the constituencies involved. Ways to challenge suppression of research data include individual requests, exposés, refusal to suppress, publicity, creating new data, and social movements.

 

[CapnG]

Historically that's not the case, we loose information, from the Roman era we went into chaos and the dark ages loosing ton's of advancements.

I'm speaking of science in the modern era (renaissance and up). And all that business about respression and supression doesn't change the fact that science is at the very least capable of advancement. Religion is not.