I did listen to it on their podcast. I was impressed with Venema’s kindness. Jeanson appealed to his audience by the quote that “most of us will accept the science by accepting what someone we know says.” That was a mistake. Venema’s kind attitude turned my YEC family to being more accepting of EC. Thanks.
That part was great. I’m more concerned about the scientific side on this one. Just my 2c.
You can probably comment better,
Edited: but I think Venema was more conciliatory. Dr Jeanson seemed irritable.
I was impressed that they were open enough to accept him, though, at SEBTS. They were welcoming. Thanks
Edit: I apologize–I was too critical of Jeanson earlier. He had some good thoughts. I changed the wording above.
I thought it was outrageous when Jeanson complained that someone on the Biologos Forum called him out about manipulating the data from other scientists. Like it is okay for YEC scientists to do this to make the science fit with a literal read of Genesis, but not okay in general by secular scientists. I hope somebody told him that it was an atheist scientist (me) who called him out for lack of honesty and scientific integrity.
Venema is a knowledgeable and effective teacher of science. I would certainly endorse him to be a science teacher in a secular school as I feel he would teach according to the laws and the curriculum. However, he is not a hard charging scientist proclaiming his research as the greatest insights since Darwin himself. But I still think he was right on the facts. In general, as in the Nye-Ham debates it is not about the science, it is about playing to your base.
Presumably, in the Deep South he had very little base. One could say he was nice because of that, but his lectures in Canada were also typical. Maybe it’s his nationality.
Yes, Canada is deeply secular in science education. This evolution controversy is really just a heartland US thing. It don’t see it much in the Catholic Northeast.
You can find it here:
I have more sympathy with Venema’s approach than Jeanson. But what do you mean “Venema could have taken him on, but didn’t stoop to his level”. What Level? Are you just engaging in ad homs to back up your man? Biologos and Venema do this all the time. This forum should at least try and overcome such intellectual childishness.
The whole thing is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78vTuUaek8g with the link to the second part on the right hand side.
And we do. Ask for a clarification before pouncing though. Maybe you misread the tone, or it is poorly worded and will be immediately edited. We are on the same side.
Sorry, you’re probably right. I should not have said it that way. I meant that he wasn’t as irritable.
I also edited the note. Please feel free to catch me on that anytime. Thank you.
Randy. Thank you - we all slip sometimes.
Americans tend to fall back on the dominant narrative about the Bible and origins. They don’t seem to care about digging out the facts. Most appear to believe that there are only two options: full on Evolution or Young Earth literalism. We need to explore beyond these narratives, and we need greater clarity about the anthropological context of the writers of the biblical texts.
Yes and that is what I love about your website. I am learning so much about the anthropological context that is based on scientific inquiry.