Comment on Perspectives from alleged LSU students by Shane Hilde.
With that said, here are the points of contention I have with the biology department at LSU.
1. The evidence for a recent creation is not taught or promoted in any known biology course.
2. The theory of evolution is the ONLY scientific worldview being promoted in the biology department that we know of.
3. The professors themselves reject the church’s position, thus making them inadequate to to give due diligence to the evidence for a recent creation.
4. Extreme cases of derision have occurred toward students who believe in creation on campus. For example, at the conclusion of a Breakout session at LSU (Feb. 2009) a group of about four students (creationists) asked the professor, who had just finished a talk negating a recent, six-day creation, on what basis then do we observe the Sabbath. This angered another biology professor in the front row. Things escalated into yelling. Yes, the professor was yelling at these students. He soon lost control and said, “Your kind of thinking drives planes into buildings!” Other words such as stupid and ignorant were directed toward them. Chris Olmo, one of the four, said, “I felt betrayed because I couldn’t even ask a question. If I ask a question they call me ignorant. We do believe in science we just don’t believe in evolution. How are you supposed to learn in that kind of environment.” This was an extreme, but there have been other incidents which could be labelled minor in comparison. Seventh-day Adventist students should feel free to express their beliefs without this kind of treatment.
5. There is good experiential evidence that strongly suggests that the promotion of theistic evolution potentially leads to an agnostic or atheistic worldview.
I’d prefer that no one is fired or compelled to resign, but if LSU administration doesn’t start providing support for these students by giving them the classes they’re paying for and creating an environment supportive of their beliefs without derision and professors who know and understand the evidence for creation then these professors should be fired for their non-complience in the above areas.
Recent Comments by Shane Hilde
PUC Professor: The Noachian Flood was just a local flood?
[…] My problem is with those who wish to forcefully promote ideas and philosophies that run counter to the stated goals and ideals of the Seventh-day Adventist Church – while being paid employees of the Church! For example, you teach your students and publicly proclaim ideas that strike against the very heart of what you are actually being paid to teach. In the past, you’ve suggested to your students that the Noachian Flood described in the Bible was probably just a local Mesopotamian flood and that the Darwinian story of origins is becoming more and more well-supported by scientific evidence all the time (Link). […]
Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
[…] Many novel alleles have come from mutations. However, the functionally novel human alleles that have been produced by random genetic mutations (outside of Mendelian or epigenetic variation) have not produced functional advantages over the original gene pool of options. Rather, such mutations have resulted in an overall functional detriment to the human gene pool (Link). […]
Something From “Nothing”?
[…] Yes, mutations do produce new alleles, but these new alleles are functionally detrimental compared with the original state (by a ratio of over a million to one). You claim that some mutations are functionally beneficial and that the “diversity” produced by these mutations is vital for human survival, but these beneficial mutations are extremely rare (and never happen at all when it comes to levels of novel functional complexity requiring a minimum of more than a few hundred amino acid residues – for a protein-based system – Link). […]
Radioactive Clocks – and the “True” age of Life on Earth
[…] Consider that practically all of the hundreds of modern breeds of dogs were produced within the past 300 years or so – from the chihuahua to the Great Dane. How is that possible? Because of something known as Mendelian genetics where rapid changes or variations in phenotypes can be produced without any change in the underlying gene pool of options. No new alleles need to be evolved, Darwinian-style, at all. It’s all based on the pre-programmed potential for phenotypic variability that was originally pre-programmed into the gene pools of such animals. The problem is, Mendelian genetics has specific limitations to the changes that can be realized – limitations that cannot be transgressed. In other words, using Mendelian genetics alone, you’re not going to turn a dog into a cat or a lizard into a bird. This kind of variation would require the evolution of novel alleles and other functional genetic elements within the ancestral gene pool. (Link) […]
Young Dinosaur Fossils?
[…] blood cells, and other types of cells within dinosaur bones dating tens of millions of years old (Link). Of course, at the same the scientific community was very skeptical of this discovery, suggesting […]