creationist science fair bans science

The Creation Museum is running a science fair. Yes, it's the same thing as a slaughterhouse having a confab about veganism.

motivated ignorance

Say, do you want to inspire a budding scientist who might go on to make the kind of paradigm shifting discoveries that unlock the deepest mysteries of our universe? If you said yes, you should consider avoiding the science fair at the Creation Museum. While Ken Ham, the Australian charlatan behind the very rich and very ignorant Answers in Genesis organization which runs the so-called museum, claims that this fair is a chance to learn about the scientific method, nothing could be further from the truth.

Before submitting a proposal for a project, all entrants have to agree to a statement of faith which demands that all ideas adhere to strict Young Earth Creationism, bypassing over 400 years of profound scientific progress and obeying the literal interpretation of a large tome of religious legends and theological punditry woven together at the Council of Nicea in 325 AD by a vote of influential priests and bishops. And obviously unaware of the irony of their own statements, Section 4 of the statement of faith proclaims that…

By definition, no apparent, perceived, or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

So the Creation Museum wants to teach kids about the scientific method but rather than following the required process of collecting evidence and seeing where it leads you, they're demanding that any evidence that contradicts their conclusion be thrown out as invalid. And while they say that it's a fact that evidence is being interpreted by fallible people who don't possess all the information, somehow that doesn't apply to them, the people who are cherry picking reality to confirm their personal biases.

You don't think that the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible humans means that Ham and his staff of hacks and crackpots might be wrong, do you? Nah, can't be. Admitting that you might be completely wrong in the face of compelling evidence is something that one of those evil, secular, atheistic scientists might do…

[ story via PZ Myers ]

  archived from wowt
              
# science // creation museum / creationists / evolution / scientific method


  show comments
latest reads

the xenonite plot armor of project hail mary

Hail Mary was a badly mismanaged, rushed death trap driven by groupthink and politics, and Ryland Grace was right to balk at the idea.
the xenonite plot armor of project hail mary

how ai can love bomb you into being an asshole

In ads, chatbots are omniscient arbiters and truth brokers. In practice, they're sycophantic enablers according to the latest research.
how ai can love bomb you into being an asshole

why we're all getting meaner and meaner online

Yes, being a professional asshole is now a viable career option. Which is awful news for online discourse.
why we're all getting meaner and meaner online

how and why corporate jargon and technobabble lull the mind

Yes, sadly, some of the worst stereotypes about corporate culture really are true.
how and why corporate jargon and technobabble lull the mind

the great theoretical chatbot job apocalypse

According to Anthropic, LLMs can obliterate most white collar jobs. Well, theoretically...
the great theoretical chatbot job apocalypse

i prompt, therefore i am: how tech forgot about human agency

Tone deaf tech bros no longer seem to understand that their pitch for AI is fundamentally dystopian and dismissive.
i prompt, therefore i am: how tech forgot about human agency