How would you respond if your child said, "Mom (or Dad), I want to be a creation scientist when I grow up!"

Question

And what if he/she never grew out of it, and wanted to go to Liberty University to take classes on "Flood Geology," "Radiohaloes," and "the Incest of Eden"? That would sure put a dent in the pocketbook, if nothing else.

Answer 1

I would first have my child explain exactly what a creation scientist was just to make sure they knew what it was.. Then I would ask why, i would want to hear their reasoning..

Then I would telephone the university and get an estimate of cost so I am sure the money is available when the time comes....

Which is the exact same thing I did when my oldest said "I want to be a journalist" and when my middle said "I want to be an attorney" and my youngest said "I want to be a vetranarian."

I really don't care what profession my children choose as long as they know what they are getting themselves into and it's what they really want to do...

At age 5 my middle child wanted to be a garbage man because they get to ride on the outside of the truck and their moms don't say "Stop playing in the trash"... Very logic reasoning from a 5 yr old boy..

Answer 2

I would say, "That sounds like a big ambition and if you continue to feel this way, I will help you in any way I can to reach your goals."

However, I make sure my kids have a well rounded education and I talk to them thoroughly about all topics including science and religion. They know that they can be whatever they want to be and I'll love them and support them no matter what. Just because I don't believe in those things, doesn't mean they don't have the right to. Their adult life is their choice. I just hope my guidance will help assist them in making some of those choices.

Answer 3

Hi, Rachel,

I would say, "The scientific study isn't called creation science; it is called origins science. Objective science can neither presume creation by God, nor can it rule out intelligent design. Honest scientists look for the evidence of design in natural structures and events."

Of course, no scientist would look to stories in Genesis for evidence about origins. Rather they would look to the evidence in cosmology, physics, astronomy, biochemistry, microbiology, and geology.

The search for evidence of intelligent design is similar to the search for design in other areas. For example, forensics looks at evidence to determine if a death was caused by a criminal rather than an accident. The search for extraterrestrial intelligence examines radio signals from space in search of patterns that indicate an intelligent origin. Similarly, origins scientists look at structures and events and ask if they could be explained by natural processes (e.g., as can the patterns in crystals) or whether intelligent design is indicated (e.g., as in the monuments at Easter Island and at Stonehenge). If an extraordinarily complex unit like a protozoa can't be explained by the accidental assemblage of chemicals and minerals, than design remains a viable alternative hypothesis.

Cheers,
Bruce

Answer 4

They would pay for their own college. I am not wasting money on a non-education.

My daughter is four. She already laughed when I told her what a church was for when she asked. I don't see it happening. Besides, I only need to point to my cousin and his degree in Biology from Bob Jones to show what a waste of time it is. He wonders why the only place that would hire him was a Christian school at half the going teacher rate.

Answer 5

i've got in no way considered one in all these element. See, to be a "scientist" you need to shop on with the medical approach. no one in touch in "creationism" does one in all these element, so as that they do no longer seem to be scientists. Oh, and "have confidence" isn't in touch in any way. i do no longer "have confidence" something each and every person says. in the event that they have not got data to back up what they are asserting, this is valueless. technological expertise works on verifiable data, no longer on "have confidence." Peace. p.s. there are no "implications of the geological columns." The creationist claims approximately geological strata are cheating and truthfully shown fake via passable data.

Answer 6

Weep or laugh. Not really sure which. I know you're supposed to support your kids, but this is analogous to supporting their belief that the earth is flat. I just couldn't do it. And you make it sound like I'd be paying for their education. My kids would need to go to a real school to see a dime from me. You know, some place accredited. Really accredited, not made up accredited.

Answer 7

I would continue to love my child and wish them luck in their exploration of fairy tales, which I would not fund.

Edit 1: To Bruce - posted below.

Science does not look for evidence to support some objective. Science observes, theorizes and then makes predictions based on the evidence. If the evidence changes, the theories are amended to accomodate this.

Answer 8

A child - no problem. Kids want to grow up to be Captain Kirk or Flash Gordon. It's cute. Then they grow up and become adapted to reality.

If however, they did not grow up and wanted to pay money to be taught that at a college, they would have to pay for it themselves, if it were up to me.

Answer 9

This is why I only support Abortion if and only if it extends into the 300th Trimester.

But seriously...I suppose whatever works for them. Whatever they want to do with their life, I support them one hundred percent. I'll cry the day their beliefs force them to concede that their father is hellbound though. Not for what it will mean for me, but for what it would do psychologically to the kid having to reconcile that sort of belief.

Answer 10

Whatever makes them happy.
I won't be paying for it though. Not because of the subject, but because I'll probably still be paying off my own education then :s