Young Earth Creationism: 10-20 Year Predictions

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@jeffb

@jeffb

More PhD-ed scientists like Dr Ron Neller…

If I can’t come up with 2, I’ll cough up $20.

Two???

You want to bet that there will be two young earth creationists who get science PhDs in ten years?

There are about 25 thousand science/engineering PhDs awarded annually in the US, about 10 thousand in the UK, and about 80 thousand in Europe.

So over the next ten years there’ll be more than a million new science/engineering PhDs, not including those granted in Japan, China, India, Australia etc.

And among those 1,000,000+ new science/engineering PhDs, you want to bet that there will be at least 2 young earth creationists.

But perhaps if you had some appreciation for numbers you wouldn’t be a YEC.

[Tim]

@jeffb

@jeffb

More Global Flood scientific research similar to the recent bent rock layer studies done in the Grand Canyon’s Tapeats Sandstone

I’ll wager on 3-4 like it, or again cough up $20.

3-4 research articles in 10-20 years, means only an article every 2.5-7 years, across all the YEC research institutes. That’s a ludicrously low bar. What will all your YEC PhDs be doing with all their time? Appearing in still more Youtube videos?

@jeffb

@jeffb

In this forum: More people adhering to The Global Flood and a Young Earth.

A whole 200% increase from what’s been observed since I wandered back into PS a few months back. And since it’s been just me lately, two more is all I need. $1.

You’re hardly the only YEC to occasionally wander in. And you’re hardly a ‘regular’ here yourself – having made only 20 posts in the last quarter (7 in the last month). The last YEC regular that I can remember, @thoughtful, last posted about a year or so ago.

A couple of YECs turning up, making a couple of posts, than then disappearing back into the woodwork, over the next few years, is hardly an impressive prediction.

Here are my own predictions on that specific topic:

1. This forum won’t exist in 10 years time. Forums like this tend to have a limited lifespan – and although I myself find its content interesting, I suspect it is visibly past its peak in terms of posting volume.

2. That what new creationists (YECs included) do turn up, will spend less time on the forum than past newcomers have. This is because the forum has already dealt with the arguments before, and so is far more likely to simply repeat previous rebuttals and/or point people to old threads than to entertain a de novo rehash of the argument.

[Dan_Eastwood]

I will reply in detail tomorrow or Saturday - kind of busy today.

[Tim]

I think that, before making predictions on the future of YEC, we should perhaps ask ourselves some questions:

1. Are the predictions substantive?

As @Roy has pointed out, two more YEC PhDs, out of the million PhDs awarded each year, is a mere drop in the ocean.

2. Are the predictions consequential?

Will they have an impact on, or be indicative of, the prominance of and/or level of support for YEC?

It is hard to imagine that two more YEC PhDs will have a noticable impact on support for YEC, or materially improve its prominance.

They might give Tackett a slightly wider range of ‘talking heads’ to interview, but I suspect the average YEC-in-the-pew will neither notice or care. It’s hard to see even a ten-fold increase having much impact.

Likewise, I doubt if the average YEC-in-the-pew will notice or care if the claims being presented are on the basis of a formal (if inconclusive) study like Snelling’s, or on the basis of an off-the-top-of-his-head comment, like Neller’s. So even a fairly large number of publications isn’t going to have much impact.

3. Are the predictions unambiguous and observable?

Even if a more substantive and potentially-consequential prediction were made, such as a 50% increase in YEC PhDs, how would we know if that had happened? AFAIK, nobody is tracking the number of YEC PhDs.

So, what would be a substantive, consequential, unambiguous, and observable prediction?

One example would be an increase or decrease, beyond the margin of error, in the percentage of YECs in the US.

Gallup polling suggests that support for YEC comes mostly from the more religious (61% from weekly+ church attendence, 24% from less than monthly) – which is hardly surprising, less educated (49% HS or less, 26% college graduate), and lower incomes (42% <$50k-pa, 30% >$100k-pa).

Given this, a long-term trend of the US becoming less religious, and automation reducing the number of lower-education/lower-paying jobs, I would expect a continuation of the long-term downward trend in support for YEC, with a possible blip in the Trump years, due to Trump-induced economic instability leading to a transient boost in religiosity.

I would not expect YEC to die out, but I would expect it to die down.

[Dan_Eastwood]

@jeffb

@jeffb

More PhD-ed scientists like Dr Ron Neller…

If I can’t come up with 2, I’ll cough up $20.

I think your money is safe. It would be more interesting if these PhDs produced results based on Flood Geology that others find useful outside of apologetics.

@jeffb

@jeffb

More Global Flood scientific research similar to the recent bent rock layer studies done in the Grand Canyon’s Tapeats Sandstone

I’ll wager on 3-4 like it, or again cough up $20.

Again your money seems safe, at least from the perspective that bent rock layers are fairly common, and people (including Flood Geologists) publish about them. It would be more interesting if the Tapeats sandstone showed evidence consistent with know megaflood events (it doesn’t, as mentioned here) rather than gradual deposition. It would be more interesting still if evidence for megafloods occuring simultaneously worldwide could be demonstrated (a consilience of evidence).

@jeffb

@jeffb

Possibly more Creation-based laboratories and research centers.

Ok, I have a feeling I’m going to be paying up on this one. BUT, I’ll be a good sport and offer up a whopping $10.

Honestly, the only reason I added this one was because I just got done watching this:

This bet might be interesting! Typically there isn’t much of any research done on FG because it doesn’t offer any payback (Allen mentioned this recently). The track record of such centers is poor (The Discovery Institute has one). Still, I don’t want to take your money for nothing, so I will counter:

If a Creation-based laboratory or research center opens, and has some assurance of independent results (no statement limiting results similar to the Answers Research Journal requirement), I will pay you $10, and another $10 if this group manages to publish outside of Creationist journals or conferences.

That might at least let you break even.

I haven’t watched the video yet but I will try to make time.

@jeffb

Todd Wood and Paul Garner interview Joel Brown, who’s the new director of the Van Andel Creation Research Center, which sounded like the newest creation research center. But having just re-watched it, I see that it had been around, but in a limited capacity in the past (it did apparently have some history before its current location).

I remember watching this and wondering if a newer one like it would ever be created; which is why I posted that as a prediction. Perhaps more just me being hopeful. BUT, since this newest one exists, there’s a small chance newer ones will be created any time soon. I’ll set aside that $10 now…

That should be interesting - I hadn’t read this far yet when I made my counter, but I see no reason to change.

@jeffb

@jeffb

Computer modeling of aspects of The Global Flood.

I’ll wager on 1-2, on things like Catastrophic Plate Tectonics, or sedimentary layer formation occurring simultaneously across the globe (a similar notion to your third bullet) , or related to The Ice-Age. Again: $20.

Now were talking, but this might need some clarification. We should expect some ~simultaneous event from Ice-Ages (there are 5 of them, IIRC), not necessarily from Plate Tectonics. I think physics does not favor you here, except that CPT should be expected to leave unequivocal evidence (if it exists at all).

@jeffb

@jeffb

More evidence for The Global Flood (of course)

This one might be too subjective. I certainly believe there will be, but I’m not sure the best way to quantify it. I’m open to suggestions.

Consilience! As things stand the various Flood narratives contradict each other. IF there was a global Flood then we should expect evidence to point to a single event without contradiction.

@jeffb

@jeffb

In this forum: More people adhering to The Global Flood and a Young Earth.

A whole 200% increase from what’s been observed since I wandered back into PS a few months back. And since it’s been just me lately, two more is all I need. $1.

Deal. I would be happy to see new people here.

@jeffb

BTW do you take Venmo?

Not yet, but there’s plenty of time.

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@Tim

As @Roy has pointed out, two more YEC PhDs, out of the million PhDs awarded each year, is a mere drop in the ocean.

Minor correction: > 1m every 10 years. Still a drop in the ocean, but the Arctic ocean instead of the Pacific.

[AnEvolvedPrimate]

@Dan_Eastwood

As things stand the various Flood narratives contradict each other. IF there was a global Flood then we should expect evidence to point to a single event without contradiction.

Even the flood narrative in the Bible contradicts itself.

[dsterncardinale]

My predictions: As we (the USA) slide towards institutionalized Christian Nationalism, YEC will have more clout in some cultural and educational circles, and will continue to basically unknown and irrelevant in science.

Which is the point of YEC. That’s the goal. The science is window-dressing. AiG’s recent pivot to primarily culture war stuff exemplifies this.

[Argon]

My predictions: YEC will remain ‘viable’ as it does today, mostly constrained within religious apologetics masquerading as science. We’ll still see the same ‘issues’ of radioactive dating, the speed of light, and ‘kinds’ debated in Creationist conference proceedings. Mainstream science will progress unaffected by YEC ‘discoveries’.

SSDD. Effectively no different from when I first started monitoring about 50 years ago. Only the names change. The ‘YEC revolution’ will always be “Right around the corner, you’ll see!”

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

My prediction:

There will be an increase in the amount of YEC material taught in US schools. Not because YEC is more viable, or has more evidence, but because the authorities that would prevent this are being dismantled; the people who would implement this are being emboldened by a government that not only doesn’t care about this, but also doesn’t care about the legality of their own action or those of their supporters; and the organisations that would be expected to fight against this are likely to be overwhelmed with more pressing issues involving imprisonment and deportation.

[jeffb (Jeff)]

@Dan_Eastwood

…Still, I don’t want to take your money for nothing, so I will counter:

If a Creation-based laboratory or research center opens, and has some assurance of independent results (no statement limiting results similar to the Answers Research Journal requirement), I will pay you $10, and another $10 if this group manages to publish outside of Creationist journals or conferences.

That might at least let you break even.

A kind geasture! TY.

@Dan_Eastwood

Deal. I would be happy to see new people here.

Agreed!

@Dan_Eastwood

@jeffb

BTW do you take Venmo?

Not yet, but there’s plenty of time.

True. Plus Venmo might not be around as well!