One more thing people should be aware of when the cite some "expert" with an anti-evolution point of view. In every subject, be it biology, physics, or whatever, you will find a professor with a Ph.D. and a completely crazy idea about his/her subject. Some of these professors have produced very good work in the past, but for whatever reasons, have slipped away from scientific rigor and into crackpot beliefs.
My point is that you have to be very careful about who you listen to. If you find a geologist, for example, that believes the earth was 6000 years old, ask yourself, what papers has he/she published? Were they in peer-reviewed journals? If so, what was that journal's ranking? What do other experts in this field think about this scientist? Do any other articles cite this paper?
2007-05-19 22:14:44 · 7 answers · asked by robert 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
So, what is your problem now?
If somebody tells that the earth is 6000 years old, ask him what is his proof or what is his basis in telling about it but not what he published.OK?
jtm
2007-05-19 22:23:31 · answer #1 · answered by Jesus M 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Wonderfully put. You're right, if you dig deep enough (and I believe in some cases pay well enough) you can always find a some crazy PhD who wants to scream to the world the "truth of the bible" and how science somehow backs it up. People think this means that there is some kind of debate amongst scientists, but there isn't. The overwhelming majority (and when I say overwhelming majority, I still don’t think a lot of creationists grasp that concept) of course realize that the earth is much older than 6000 or 1000 years old. the earth is much older than 6000 or 1000 years old.
2007-05-20 05:23:05 · answer #2 · answered by A 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Besides that, we have plenty of people who forget to mention that their PhD is in an area other than what they're going on about.
Or folks who let an e-mail address at a prestigious university (while employed as a computer tech or such) imply that they have a proper academic affiliation.
It's not just those who've wandered astray from good scientific process. It's those who've never practiced it in the first place.
2007-05-20 05:32:37 · answer #3 · answered by The angels have the phone box. 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yep! Your Question asks how much credibility does any "expert" have in the eyes of the thousands of people worldwide who collectively have the expertise that makes the discipline exist. It is mature and prudent to check for peer review and to establish a journal is authoritative or loony fringe.
(Not that I'm casting nasturtiums upon my fellow loony fringe types)
2007-05-20 05:39:40 · answer #4 · answered by jinjalina 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, just look into cryptozoology :) Just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean they know what they're talking about, same with a priest.
2007-05-20 05:19:19 · answer #5 · answered by Daisy Indigo 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Kent Hovind and other creationists have graduated from non-accredited christian colleges.
2007-05-20 05:17:24 · answer #6 · answered by Real christian 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
you DO NOT need to be careful who you listen to, only who you choose to believe.
2007-05-20 05:20:22 · answer #7 · answered by Invisible_Flags 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋