Creationists Flunk Masters Degree

MJ

Thank you for your respectful feedback. I agree with you for the most part. What I know of this issue, I gained from following the links in Julia's article.

The Institute for Creation Research was seeking an accredited online M.S. degree for teachers in private schools. They were not trying to force a curriculum based on creationism into the public schools, which is what your last statement implies. For the ICR, I am sure they believe they are teaching the correct science, just as does Texas A&M.

Finally, I have taken required classes at both the B.S. and M.S. levels I did not totally believe in or support. But they were required for the degree and they did at least expand my thinking and understandng.

SuperA

Thank you for your respectful feedback. I agree with you as well. And as a person who has studied this topic in-depth, I appreciate your insight, even admitting that some beliefs are laughable. But let me ask you this, SuperA.

Assume you are in some rain forest studying a tribe's beliefs on creation. When the Chief tells you a particularly "crazy to you" belief, would you laugh to his face and sarcastically use a word with a specific sacred meaning? I do not think you would. And this was my point.

This is a public forum of sorts that attracts people with diverse backgrounds. Staff writers should write their postings with that sensitivity.

One of the popular forum posts regards a proposal allowing the "sacred buffalo" to roam again freely from Canada to the U.S. This is a very symbolic and an important part of some Native Americans' belief system. I seriously doubt the Mother Jones editors would allow Julia to introduce that subject the way she has this one.

And that was my original point. Disagree with a concept? Fine?but do so respectfully, as you have done.

Julia

Many world religions have a creationist plank in their religious platform, including many "First People" groups.

Would you make light of and celebrate a North American tribe's setback regarding their religion? Or do you just celebrate setbacks that happen to Evangelical Christians?

Perhaps you might consider hosting a forum on Religious Myths so you can shout the sect's appropriate word of praise as you laugh at their beliefs. Ghost Dancers, Pot-Bellied Statues, Trees, Cows. You could have a field day!

Global warming is the religion of the pagans. If you speak against global warming, these pagans look for their goddess tree and a rope to lynch you. How enlightened.

See Ben Stein's movie eXpelled.

In response to Sarah:
Read the articles in Scientific American about how all of the scientists interviewed were mislead and the whole event was staged using mostly hired extra's to fill the auditorium.

Researchers studying long-term changes in sea temperatures said they now expect a "lull" for up to a decade while natural variations in climate cancel out the increases caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.(Today's NY Times)

The average temperature of the sea around Europe and North America is expected to cool slightly over the decade while the tropical Pacific remains unchanged.

This would mean that the 0.3°C global average temperature rise which has been predicted for the next decade by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change may not happen, according to the paper published in the scientific journal Nature.
This means that from a practical standpoint climate models are of no practical use beyond providing some intellectual authority in the promotional battle over global climate policy. I am sure that some model somewhere has foretold how the next 20 years will evolve (and please ask me in 20 years which one!). And if none get it right, it won't mean that any were actually wrong. If there is no future over the next few decades that models rule out, then anything is possible. And of course, no one needed a model to know that.

Please don't lynch me if I am an unbeliever.

Sarah, I don't believe that the US could have 'won' a nuclear war with the former Soviet Union but doing nothing to prevent a nuclear war seems like an awful way to validate the science behind opposing theories on that subject.

Barry -

Great points. And I concede that respect is always vital - even for beliefs we find humorous. But I also think it's possible to laugh at a belief on one level, and respect it on another - two different planes of analysis.

I'm not sure that your two situations are really comparable. For one, as an anthropologist (I'll speak for myself here) I take a particular mythology and try to figure out how it functions in the society at large - how does a belief have real impacts on the way people operate. To do this, we need to look at the underlying power dynamics of a belief system in the society. On this point, Christian origin myths in our society are quite different than indigenous origin myths in a "tribal" society (which btw you can't just lump together into something abstractly singular) - one could write several dissertations on this.

Second: context, context, context. I wouldn't laugh in a "chief's" face anymore than I would laugh in a pastor's. But that is not the context of Julia's post. Her comments relate to the role religion plays in our educational system and our government at large - calling on rational, scientific analysis to be placed over religion in our classrooms (something that even many pastors agree with). And she's speaking to Americans, who have passionately debated this point since the founding of the colonies - you might be surprised at how "the founders" flung insults at each other over their beliefs. She's snarky, I'll grant you that, and she walks a fine line. But for me, I don't have an issue with that. It's important to be critical, and even to make fun of religion occasionally - even religious people do this.

On another note, I've spoken with many very religious intellectuals who believe the best way for religion to flourish is to keep it separate from the government, to not have it taught by government teachers with an approved curriculum, but to have it be something one explores personally, with their pastors, with the freedom to push and pull their beliefs over time. In this context, I find it somewhat ironic that the "Christian Right" thinks they should couple with government.

Thanks for the discussion, and the opportunity to ramble on this topic again.

There's an Indian - as in, Hindu, from India - university that opened not too long ago, and the Hindu leaders of the university were offering classes in the hope of doing God's work, including classes on Hindu Astrology. Not astronomy - astrology. The study of horoscopes.

Now, being a conservative Catholic, it's not something that I would attend, but I can appreciate their attempts to serve God, and find that the addition of the class is refreshing in reminding us that there are people of all stripes, and it's better for us to learn about each other in a respectful manner, rather than assume that everyone is a "heathen" with barbaric practices. We all know that not to be true.

Now, if I were to attend that university for, say, a technicial degree to become an enginner, and that was one of the required courses, I think it would be *very* silly of me to try to force a school to take away a course, just because I cannot practice divination. Any school board with understanding will help a student find an alternative. Being unable to take a class at a mainstream university (U of Houston), the administrators helped me find a suitable alternative. Everyone was happy.

It seems these days that people are so bent out of shape over anything Christian, but will bend over backwards to allow non-Christians to express their feelings and desires.

Grant you, I am not a literal Creationist - I don't believe in the six-day creation, but I do believe that creation was well-organized. So, since it goes against my beliefs, I'd have to bow out of that class as well. But as pointed out above, the class was meant for people who are going to teach at private, Evangelical shools.

I should hope that we have grown up past our intolerance, but instead, intolerance seems to be shifting around, so that people who were once the mainstay are now under fire. A pity, that instead of recognizing our forefather's faults and avoiding them, we try to emulate them.