If a scientist who worked for a tabacco company said smoking was harmless?

Question

would you believe him? Of course not. You'd say he had an agenda, right?

so, why do you believe a "Creationist Scientist" who professes his faith in Christianity. Isn't that a conflict of interest?

Now, please find me a SINGLE "Creation Scientist" who doesn't have said conflict.

my point is that if the evidence for Creationism were in the slightest bit compelling, there would be at least ONE scientist who subscribed who wasn't an avowed Bible thumper. But you can't find one. Not one. Meanwhile, there are PLENTY of Christian scientists who believe in Evolution

Answer 1

If you look at it as a scientist, take it one step further-
Christianity is a relative newcomer to the world, even if you think the world is only 6000 years old.
All of the creation scientists point to their pseudoscience as "proof" of a creator, bit none of the other faiths, not even the older ones, agree with them.

Even if their evidence is for a creator, why is it that other faiths with a creator don't reach the same conclusion, for the most part.

Creation Science is almost entirely Christian. If it is so very obvious, why don't the other faiths have it?

I've nothing against a person believing in Intelligent Design, but if they wish to call it a science and have it taught in secular schools, they are consenting to it being studied objectively, and EVERY TIME it is studied objectively, it fails.

Answer 2

To have a conflict of interest, there must be something to gain from the expression of the theory. What is it that the "Creation scientist" has to gain that creates this "conflict of interest"?
You are not making a very solid analogy here. Both scientists would be viewed with skepticism, but there is little fact either way.

Answer 3

Our world is full of scientists spreading every conceivable reason they can come up with that puts fear in the hearts of people, it is scientists that have created all these things that are harmful to us, and it's all in the name of research dollars, hundreds of millions every year just to say you will die, get sick, or may be harmful, we humans have a brain, unfortunately we do not use it, we simply believe every thing we are told without question, even when we know it is not true.

Answer 4

I'd go one step further. Find a 'creationist scientist' regardless of their religion who has published a paper on creationism in a reputable peer-reviewed science journal.

That there aren't any speaks volumes.

Answer 5

Your argument is like saying that an atheistic evolutionist has a conflict of interest. He does his research with a bias towards the outcome.

I think that you are correct. Both camps are guilty of this flaw. Bot are, however, able to arrive at the correct conclusions. Unfortunately, because of man's increadible ability to rationalize anything, we do not uncover the truth that is staring at us right in the face.

Answer 6

Actually, smoking was considered beneficial 100+ years ago, regularly prescribed by physicians to alleviate symptoms of asthma, tuberculosis, and other upper respiratory conditions. Hmmmm.... great parallel!

Answer 7

LOL

Well done! Of couse, there aren't any.

Nobody exists who fits your description...

NOT A SINGLE PERSON.

What a coincidence!! What are the odds??

This should qualify as a miracle!!

Answer 8

he is juz crapping around and shld ont be trusted...they say tat onli to sell the tobbacco and cannot be trusted since other scientists all over e world have all proven tobbacco is harmful

Answer 9

Are you naive enough to think Secular Scientist don't have a agenda.

Answer 10

Just an aside....should Churches have warnings on the side that say may cause damage to your sense of reality?