Monday, March 24, 2014
Like An Extremely Near-sighted Person Who Scorns Eyeglasses
[W]hat a person thinks on his own, without being stimulated by the thoughts and experiences of other people, is...even in the best case rather paltry and monotonous.
- Albert Einstein (April 1952)
Creationist Ray Comfort complained that Neil deGrasse Tyson had misrepresented the Bible.
The astrophysicist and host of Fox’s “Cosmos” said recently that using the Bible as a scientific source was problematic, because no one had ever scientifically proven a theory based on scripture.
Comfort said last week on his online “Comfort Zone” program that Tyson wasn’t qualified to make that determination because he’s not a theologian.
“You know, the word ‘science,’ it’s kind of a magical word,” Comfort said. “‘I believe in science.’ It just means knowledge, that’s all it means. There’s different areas of science, different areas of knowledge. When you say the Bible is not a science book, you’re saying it’s not a knowledge book? It tells us how God created the Earth!”
Knowledge, of course, is not quite all that defines science, which is characterized by systematic methods of observation in pursuit of new understanding.
But Comfort insisted the Bible was a science book because it described the origins of the universe.
“It gives us the basis for all creation, and it passes the scientific method,” he said. “It’s observable – Genesis – and testable. Evolution is not. You can’t observe something 60 million years old, but you can observe what Genesis says.”
For example, Comfort argued, the Book of Genesis mentions that animals reproduce other animals like themselves, and that can be observed on the fossil record.
Wait, so now Creationists accept the fossil record is evidence of something and are trying to coopt science? Wonder if Ken Ham agrees?
March 24, 2014 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Like An Extremely Near-sighted Person Who Scorns Eyeglasses:
"Oh Magoo! You've done it again!"
Posted by: Rmj | Mar 24, 2014 9:43:21 PM
Perhaps electricity in space might be taken into account, but it is not conventionally considered or generally understood, for instance that the electric force is faster than light, and indeed then there is no need to invent dark matter and dark energy to comprise more than 95% of all that is claimed to exist despite their non-detectability.
Posted by: Mahakal / מהכאל | Mar 24, 2014 10:47:33 PM