Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?

You are not logged in. [Log In] unOFFICIAL WORLDWIDE ADVENTIST FORUM » Forums » Bible, Theology and Related items » Origins » Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable?

Page 16 of 17

...

Topic Options

Rate This Topic

#80649 - 05/18/06 06:20 PM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: ]
Jeannieb43 Princess of Pasadena Registered: 12/29/01 Posts: 2390 Loc: California	Quote: I just received this email response from Elaine Kennedy, the geologist who visited the White Cliffs of Dover: "I have examined three areas in Southern England and find it hard to believe they require slow deposition. I have been struck by the purity of the chalks which requires rapid deposition of the coccoliths and the diatoms which migrate through the chalk and form nodules as the weight of the overburden increases. In addition there are upright stumps and their associated "stromatolites" preserved in the chalks and this again would require rapid deposition. I do not have any references for you as I am retired and no longer have the materials I collected regarding the sites. Yours in Christ, Elaine G. Kennedy, Ph.D. Geology website: http://origins.swau.edu email: ElaineGKennedy@gmail.com I'm glad to see this email from Elaine Kennedy. She and her husband were members of the same church as my husband and I during the late '80s. I always enjoyed her talks on geology. She used to explain that her belief in the "short chronology" was never a barrier to her obtaining her Ph.D. and that her professors were always open to her arguments re: the short chronology explanations of each of her projects, though they personally may not have agreed with her timeline. _________________________ Jeannie ...Change is inevitable; growth is optional....
Top

#80650 - 05/18/06 07:31 PM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: alisha]
David Koot Craftsman Registered: 03/13/06 Posts: 3513 Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m	Quote: She used to explain that her belief in the "short chronology" was never a barrier to her obtaining her Ph.D. and that her professors were always open to her arguments re: the short chronology explanations of each of her projects, though they personally may not have agreed with her timeline. This statement tends to underscore the position I am taking. I see credible, professionally-trained scientists examining the same evidence and coming down on different sides of the question. And, it sounds like Ms. Kennedy was able to present her conclusions to a respectful audience, even though they may not have agreed with her conclusions. One might assume that she had sufficient credibility in her presentation, to support the award of a Ph.D. That should say a lot. I think it is reasonable to accept what Ms. Kennedy has written in her email. She is now retired, and apparently doesn't have her notebooks available, but I see no reason to discount the brief summary of what she found. Nor would it seem appropriate to accuse her of 'bias,' any more than evolutionary scientists might be accused of 'bias.' I am not suggesting that either camp is able to PROVE its position. That is not my issue, personally. Simply that there is evidence, and credible explanations for that evidence. Also remembering that the narrow issue at the moment, is the White Cliffs of Dover.
Top

#80651 - 05/19/06 01:17 AM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: ]
bevin Registered: 09/04/02 Posts: 4699 Loc: New England	Quote: She used to explain that her belief in the "short chronology" was never a barrier to her obtaining her Ph.D PhD's in science are not required to believe anything - they are simply required to demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the facts, the various published theories, and to be able to apply those theories. /Bevin
Top

#80652 - 05/19/06 01:21 AM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: ]
bevin Registered: 09/04/02 Posts: 4699 Loc: New England	Quote: One might assume that she had sufficient credibility in her presentation, to support the award of a Ph.D. That should say a lot. It depends - (1) did her presentation have ANYTHING to do with the age of the earth, (2) even if it did, all she has to do is show a possible short-age explanation for some one phenomona, not a disprove of a huge area of knowledge Quote: I am not suggesting that either camp is able to PROVE its position. She didn't provide strong evidence in favor of anything to do with the age of the earth - and she certainly did not provide an explanation for the White Cliffs Quote: Simply that there is evidence, and credible explanations for that evidence No credible short-age explanation for the White Cliffs has been advanced, by her or anyone else. /Bevin
Top

#80653 - 05/19/06 05:56 AM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: Mandy]
David Koot Craftsman Registered: 03/13/06 Posts: 3513 Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m	Quote: PhD's in science are not required to believe anything - they are simply required to demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the facts, the various published theories, and to be able to apply those theories. Perhaps it varies with the university, and with the prof. My brother's PhD supervisor at Harvard REALLY grilled him and demanded some pretty credible work product. It sounds like Ms. Kennedy did not simply apply the prevailing theory. She would have had to build a case in OPPOSITION to the published theories. It would be interesting to ask her about that in more detail. Perhaps that would be a good thing to do.
Top

#80654 - 05/19/06 06:04 AM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: Mandy]
David Koot Craftsman Registered: 03/13/06 Posts: 3513 Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m	Quote: It depends - (1) did her presentation have ANYTHING to do with the age of the earth, But the age of the earth has not been an issue in this discussion. Quote: (2) even if it did, all she has to do is show a possible short-age explanation for some one phenomona, not a disprove of a huge area of knowledge Sounds like she did so, for the White Cliffs of Dover. Quote: No credible short-age explanation for the White Cliffs has been advanced, by her or anyone else. She briefly referred to some key issues. Jeannie also recalls hearing her presentations about them. I think it would be reasonable to assume that Ms. Kennedy does have much more complete information, but simply not at her fingertips. She was responding to an email. We can always follow up and ask her for more information. Perhaps that is something we should do.
Top

#80655 - 05/19/06 06:07 AM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matte [Re: ]
Bravus Husband and Father Registered: 09/05/04 Posts: 6185 Loc: Brisbane, Australia	I guess one of the issues is that she claimed simultaneous burial based on the uniformity... but if I understand what bevin said correctly the sheer volume of creatures required to provide all that chalk all being alive at one time is an issue itself. It'd be interesting to have Dr Kennedy's explanation of that issue: the sheer volume of creatures and whether that accumulated all at one time or over time. _________________________ If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve
Top

#80656 - 05/19/06 06:14 AM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matte [Re: Billy Dennis]
David Koot Craftsman Registered: 03/13/06 Posts: 3513 Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m	Very well, I can email Dr. Kennedy and ask her about that--unless you would rather do so. (And personally, I would prefer that you do so. You are a peer of hers. I am not.) Her email address is posted above. _________________________ "Study to show yourself approved by God, a good workman who needs not be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15
Top

#80657 - 05/19/06 01:35 PM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: ]
bevin Registered: 09/04/02 Posts: 4699 Loc: New England	Quote: She was responding to an email. We can always follow up and ask her for more information. Perhaps that is something we should do. Ms. Kennedy has retired after a career facing the emotional weight of knowing that the science she understood and her religious beliefs were not easily reconciled. Personally, I do not wish reawaken that conflict in her. There are things in my past I would rather leave behind, this may well be one of hers. Quote: She briefly referred to some key issues. Jeannie also recalls hearing her presentations about them. She did not propose a solution for them, within the short-age flood model, nor did she have an scientific reason for why they would be a problem for the long-age model. Quote: I think it would be reasonable to assume that Ms. Kennedy does have much more complete information, but simply not at her fingertips. I think it is reasonable to assume she saw the Cliffs, realised how big a conflict she was facing, found a couple of hooks to hang her preconceptions on, and gave up on the issue. She would have become famous if she could have shown that the White Cliff's must have formed quickly. They presented a huge opportunity - and apparently she walked away with a hand wave. Like I say, she faced a huge conflict between two things that both appealed to her - science and and overly literal interpretation of Genesis. /Bevin
Top

#80658 - 05/20/06 06:21 AM Re: Strict Biblical Literalism on Scientific Matters: Is It Tenable? [Re: Mandy]
David Koot Craftsman Registered: 03/13/06 Posts: 3513 Loc: N38d14.516m, W122d37.982m	Bevin, upon reading your latest post here, I see that you have said a number of things about Dr. Kennedy and her work. Since you have, and since this is a public forum, fairness would seem to dictate that she be apprised of same. Accordingly, I havecommunicated these items to her via email, for her comment. Let's see what she has to say about them.
Top

Page 16 of 17

Hop to:

Vegefood store

Be sure to click on the free shipping at the checkout else you get charged.