Is All YEC Really Pseudoscience?

[Philosurfer (Daniel Deen)]

@deuteroKJ

From the best of YECs (e.g., Todd Wood, Kurt Wise, Paul Garner), what i hear is that the Bible becomes part of the data set for their understanding of “science.” What is the reasonable response to this?

This is definitely a big question to untangle in the public forums as well as the professional literature. Alvin Plantinga probably has the most distinguished voice, academically and popularly, as to how one can unlock the Scriptures as an evidence base or data set with which to engage the natural sciences (with special emphasis on the biological sciences). His argument is broad enough to work with TE/EC, ID, YEC, and Swamidass (since he insists on being distanced from all those other positions)

@swamidass

I think this is really helpful as they are acknowledging that Scripture is part of how they come to their conclusions about the age of the earth.

This part of my comments also follow what I said @deuteroKJ

What I always try to remind my YEC brethren about is that the very same methodology(ies) they use to show the problems with an old earth are actually the same methodologies they employ to verify (scientifically) the Scriptures they trust so faithfully. Strong YEC proponents love to bring forward problems with any individual test of age, e.g., radio carbon dating, but never take them as calibrated against all the other age tests employed, e.g., tree rings, ice cores, star light, etc… The problem is that YEC proponents are all the more willing to employ the very same data when something in Biblical archeology unearths something pertinent to the Biblical narrative as understood by YEC proponents – What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander! Or at least a deserves a more careful conversation…

@swamidass

At the very least, even if YEC is ultimately true, it would build trust to clean house and decry the bad arguments in your own camp.

This is important in that it appears to me at least that PeacefulScience.org is attempting this in a fashion that is more hospitable to overall inconsistencies. We can heatedly, yet peacefully, disagree about that which fundamentally separates us all politically, denominationaly, scientifically, culturally, whatever…

In that sense, this forum is NOT attempting to approach the internet landscape as that of Jesus and the temple in that none of us think we have the character/qualities of Jesus to actually clean the temple. We come to understand and argue so that we can be better ambassadors to our own contingencies about the “others” that actually exist “out there” – even that rascally @Patrick

@deuteroKJ

which I focus primarily on the “bsst.”

I have no idea what this means!

@deuteroKJ

Unfortunately, circumstances (quite related to my view on creation) has removed me from having these more normal, on-going relationships and discussions. Perhaps if we get the ETS 2019 session to go, we can pick this up again.

@swamidass

We should, but want to emphasize that YEC is a populist movement that has honed its rhetoric. They usually win hands down on rhetoric. It is really important to meet them on that same ground, speaking their language, so they can understand us.

@deuteroKJ

Let’s talk privately both pre- and post ETS 2018. I think we could come up with a fantastic session & panel for 2019.

Okay, I take back a little about what I mentioned before about not taking the Jesus account of cleaning house. This blog is an open historical record of what all are talking about. IF this panel comes to be, it should be noted that at least @swamidass and @deuteroKJ have made perfectly clear the “tactic” they are going to employ. The strategy is not something “done in a corner,” but open to all to see. What I’m suggesting is something akin to the OT prophets being fulfilled in Jesus. Josh and Ken have declared their overall motives and strategies to conversing about this issue, COULD other websites and conversations follow suite?

@swamidass

Here is one we certainly should include: @pmcelliott. Did you see his comments on a Genealogical Adam?

@pmcelliott From a slightly biased perspective, ummmm… YES!

@deuteroKJ

Let’s talk privately both pre- and post ETS 2018. I think we could come up with a fantastic session & panel for 2019.

Playing on the putting it in the open in order to test the “prophets,” did you guys know that the EPS (Evangelical Philosophical Society) meets the week before in the same venue as the ETS. This, I have been told, is so that those who have any crossover can make both sessions. It seems that this topic of the Genealogical Adam and perhaps the tension between the different factions (RTB, AiG, BioLogos, etc) might make for an interesting session at the EPS as well… I’m throwing this out there for @deuteroKJ and @swamidass but also for any others out there reading – it might be worth setting something up at the Evangelical Philosophers conference to discuss. I am NOT currently a member, but have been planning to join for the last 5+ years! I can investigate the procedure, but would like to open it up to a larger community first.