Comment on LSU memorandum confirms Educate Truth’s allegations by Eddie.
David Read wrote:
David Read: Our colleges should be platforms for scientific creationism, but instead they are becoming platforms for Darwinism, which is merely an apologetic arm of atheism, an alternative version of earthâ€™s origins that leaves God out of the picture.
Actually SDA colleges still have many science professors who believe in scientific creationism. However, many find it a bit tough to find time and money to do anything other than teach heavy loads for 15-25% less than what the denomination pays primary and secondary school teachers, and many like myself wind up moonlighting to pay off overspent credit cards.
SDA colleges can’t even afford to send professors to professional meetings. My institution, for example, provides only $500 a year to attend a professional meeting. I would be happy to attend the creation meetings hosted by the SDA Church, but travel and lodging anywhere these days for a 3-5 day meeting easily exceeds $1000.
Furthermore, origins-related research isn’t free. Where does one apply for a grant to fund origins research? It’s much easier for biologists to get $$$ for studying obscurities like slime molds and deep sea shrimp than to study the age of ice layers in Antarctica.
Eddie Also Commented
LSU memorandum confirms Educate Truth’s allegations
Professor Kent, I think it’s time to concede that Sean Pitman has been right all along. Our beliefs must be based 100% on empiricism and 0% on faith. All scientific data, without exception, prove beyond doubt the Biblical truth that all life was created in 6 literal, 24-hour days about 6000 years ago, and Noah’s flood covered 100% of the Earth’s surface. Any SDA professor or administrator who disagrees must resign or be fired. In fact, anybody who disagrees is not even SDA. Seventh-day Darwinists are not SDA and never can be, unless they repent and agree with Sean. The sooner we stop arguing the better, so this ignominous website can finally be closed.
GMF: Frankly, I do not believe pay is the main problem. If we all should sacrifice why should profs be exempt?
Excuse me: SDA profs often get paid LESS than primary and secondary school teachers in SDA schools across the street!!! Do you seriously think it is fair for a professor with a PhD degree to be paid less than a teacher with a BS degree? Whenever a vacancy occurs in a SDA college or university, there are very few applicants and often the only applicants are fringe SDAs who superficially support the church’s mission. Can leaders be blamed for not hiring conservative SDAs when none apply? Why is it that so few conservative SDAs seek a career as a professor?
If you don’t believe me, simply ask any biology professor at Educate Truth’s two favorite universities why they can’t find suitable candidates for their vacancies, which they continue to advertise for year after year.
How can the SDA church expect to staff SDA colleges and universities with professors dedicated to the mission of the SDA church when nearly all students interested in science wind up in health care professions? Has the church ever asked health care professionals to sacrifice?
Out of curiosity, Sean, if educating truth is so important for you, why did you pursue a career in medicine rather than education?
David Read: I would like to see an Adventist foundation created solely to fund creationist research
I would love to see that happen!
Recent Comments by Eddie
SDA Bio Prof: The Bible makes multiple falsifiable prophecies about Nebuchadnezzar conquering Egypt, yet history never records it happening. Does this mean the Bible is effectively falsified?
Sean Pitman: Egyptians had a strong tendency not to record their losses… only their victories.
Sean, does that mean YOU personally believe Babylon conquered Egypt, just as predicted by two prophets? In the absence of any empirical evidence? If the Egyptians didn’t record their losses, why wouldn’t the Babylonians have recorded such a stunning victory?
Holly Pham: One of the things that has always concerned me is that, according to what I’ve read, birds and reptiles have completely different forms of respiratory systems (flow-through vs. bellows) How is this explained by evolutionists?
Evidence from the vertebrae of non-avian theropod dinosaurs suggests that they, too, possessed unidirectional flow-through ventilation of the lungs. So, according to evolutionary theory, it evolved first in “primitive” non-avian theropods rather than in birds, and comprises one of many shared derived characters supposedly linking birds with more “advanced” theropods. However, I don’t think there is any evidence or even a hypothesis for a step-by-step process of HOW it evolved. Here is a reference:
Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
@Bob Helm: Bob, if you send me an e-mail at email@example.com I will send you a pdf file of a 1991 article published by Chatterjee in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 332:277-342, titled “Cranial anatomy and relationships of a new Triassic bird from Texas.”
Curiously his description is based only on cranial anatomy. I don’t think he ever published an analysis of its postcranial anatomy.
David Read: Eddie, ecological zonation will yield the same basic order that you’re pointing to: invertebrates appear before vertebrates; fish appear before amphibians; amphibians appear before reptiles; reptiles appear before mammals; reptiles appear before birds, etc.
It could, and it’s the best creationist explanation, but it doesn’t explain why flowering plants were absent from lowland forests. Or why so many land plants appeared before mangroves, which today occur strictly in the intertidal zone. Or why no pre-flood humans have been found. Or, if Sean is correct that the flood ended at the K-T boundary, why many modern groups of birds and mammals (including marine mammals) which first appear during the Tertiary were not buried by the flood.
David Read: The fact that something appears before something else in the fossil record is not proof than anything evolved into anything else.
David Read: You seem to be complaining that God has not made the fossil evidence compulsory, i.e., so clear that no reasonable person can possibly doubt it. And if God hasn’t made the evidence skeptic-proof, then the skeptic is God’s fault, God is responsible for the skeptic.
I’m not complaining. I’m merely pointing out that the evidence can be interpreted in different ways by honest people. And I’m relieved to see that even you don’t think the evidence is crystal clear.
David Read: Only people of faith can be saved, that is, only people who are willing to trust God and put away doubts can be saved.
David Read: Those tracks are so obviously bird tracks that the fact that some scientists want to assign them to “birdlike theropods” is itself a very useful teaching tool as to how the model creates the data.
David Read: That the model actually creates the data is one of the hardest concepts to get across, not only to lay people but even to the scientists themselves.
How does the model affect the data? Data don’t change and they shouldn’t change. It’s the interpretation, not the data, that is affected by the model.