Southern history professor pushing creationism

[Hollie]

Hollie you must understand that all the first scientists were Christian. Tell me you know this.

A Catholic priest was the first to propose the Big Bang Theory.

Hollie you must understand that all the first scientists were Christian. Tell me you know this.

A Catholic priest was the first to propose the Big Bang Theory.

It's all happy-fun shenanigans until the church capos make you an offer you can't refuse.

Just ask Copernicus and Galileo Galilei.

Let's ask Dr. James Watson, Dr. Jason Richwine, Dr. Helmuth Nyborg, Dr. Bjørn Lomborg, Dr. Larry Summers what happens when the "church" capos make you an offer you can't refuse.

Outstanding. Ignore the history of the church.

Denial makes everything so simple, doesn't it?

Why focus on historical events when they have no bearing on the present and the orthodoxy is instead being brutally enforced by liberals? To do so suggests an interest focused more on religion bashing than championing science. The censors now are mostly liberals.

Here's how the church deals with science:

Monseigneur Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître, (French: [ʒɔʁʒə ləmɛtʁ] (

listen); 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian priest, astronomer and professor of physics at the French section of the Catholic University of Leuven.[1] He was the first known academic to propose the theory of the expansion of the universe, widely misattributed to Edwin Hubble.[2][3] He was also the first to derive what is now known as Hubble's law and made the first estimation of what is now called the Hubble constant, which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble's article.[4][5][6][7] Lemaître also proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, which he called his "hypothesis of the primeval atom" or the "Cosmic Egg". . . . .

By 1951, Pope Pius XII declared that Lemaître's theory provided a scientific validation for existence of God and Catholicism. However, Lemaître resented the Pope's proclamation.[18][19] When Lemaître and Daniel O'Connell, the Pope's science advisor, tried to persuade the Pope not to mention Creationism publicly anymore, the Pope agreed. He persuaded the Pope to stop making proclamations about cosmology.[20] While a devout Roman Catholic, he was against mixing science with religion​

Yep. Religions evolve. A flat earth, geocentrism and witch hunts are more difficult now than they used to be.

Not too many weathermen being burned at the stake these days for predicting a solar eclipse.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Not too many weathermen being burned at the stake these days for predicting a solar eclipse.

Let's ask Dr. James Watson, Dr. Jason Richwine, Dr. Helmuth Nyborg, Dr. Bjørn Lomborg, Dr. Larry Summers what happens when the "church" capos make you an offer you can't refuse.

 

[Hollie]

Not too many weathermen being burned at the stake these days for predicting a solar eclipse.

Let's ask Dr. James Watson, Dr. Jason Richwine, Dr. Helmuth Nyborg, Dr. Bjørn Lomborg, Dr. Larry Summers what happens when the "church" capos make you an offer you can't refuse.

Fortunately, the church has had to revise its position on science as it has had to revise its position on many things. The glaring light of open investigation has stripped the church of its once formidable arsenal of fear and intimidation, capice?

 

[AmericanFirst]

Richard Dawkins calls out Georgia Southern history professor for pushing creationism


Richard Dawkins calls out Georgia Southern history professor for pushing creationism

Richard Dawkins is an idiot. Good for the Professor.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Not too many weathermen being burned at the stake these days for predicting a solar eclipse.

Let's ask Dr. James Watson, Dr. Jason Richwine, Dr. Helmuth Nyborg, Dr. Bjørn Lomborg, Dr. Larry Summers what happens when the "church" capos make you an offer you can't refuse.

Fortunately, the church has had to revise its position on science as it has had to revise its position on many things. The glaring light of open investigation has stripped the church of its once formidable arsenal of fear and intimidation, capice?

That formidable arsenal of fear and intimidation has now been taken over by liberals, capisce? So why are you tilting at windmills by focusing on religion instead of battling the close-minded enforcers of liberalism?

 

[AmericanFirst]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Not too many weathermen being burned at the stake these days for predicting a solar eclipse.

Let's ask Dr. James Watson, Dr. Jason Richwine, Dr. Helmuth Nyborg, Dr. Bjørn Lomborg, Dr. Larry Summers what happens when the "church" capos make you an offer you can't refuse.

Fortunately, the church has had to revise its position on science as it has had to revise its position on many things. The glaring light of open investigation has stripped the church of its once formidable arsenal of fear and intimidation, capice?

Since when? Why? I wouldn't. The Bible is the truth, not dawkins or darwin.

 

[MrDVS1]

Richard Dawkins calls out Georgia Southern history professor for pushing creationism


Richard Dawkins calls out Georgia Southern history professor for pushing creationism

Anyone who would push creationism isn't smart enough to be a professor.....or did he have a stroke or something?

 

[MrDVS1]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Actually we have real concrete evidence for evolution, show us the concrete evidence for creationism !

 

[Luissa]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Lol

 

[AmericanFirst]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Actually we have real concrete evidence for evolution, show us the concrete evidence for creationism !

Even Darwin said to prove evolution you need to find the missing link, that hasn't happened. Evolution within the species yes, but from an ape to man or single cell organism to a man is far fetched and unprovable.

 

[AmericanFirst]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Lol

LOL at satan worshipers.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Richard Dawkins calls out Georgia Southern history professor for pushing creationism


Richard Dawkins calls out Georgia Southern history professor for pushing creationism

Anyone who would push creationism isn't smart enough to be a professor.....or did he have a stroke or something?

And yet sociology departments and political science departments and anthropology departments and economics departments and history departments are full of creationists.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bacon, Newton, Galilleo, Darwin even, all believed in God.

Hollie, creationism of 6,000 years is flatly wrong, wildly so.

Christians who have comfort in their God have no trouble with faith and science.

 

[MrDVS1]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Actually we have real concrete evidence for evolution, show us the concrete evidence for creationism !

Even Darwin said to prove evolution you need to find the missing link, that hasn't happened. Evolution within the species yes, but from an ape to man or single cell organism to a man is far fetched and unprovable.

I think it is more than obvious that man did not evolve from apes, otherwise there wouldn't be any apes.
We are just another species of primate that developed on it's own, just like all the other individual species of primates. No wizards, no mystics, no gods!

 

[AmericanFirst]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Actually we have real concrete evidence for evolution, show us the concrete evidence for creationism !

Even Darwin said to prove evolution you need to find the missing link, that hasn't happened. Evolution within the species yes, but from an ape to man or single cell organism to a man is far fetched and unprovable.

I think it is more than obvious that man did not evolve from apes, otherwise there wouldn't be any apes.
We are just another species of primate that developed on it's own, just like all the other individual species of primates. No wizards, no mystics, no gods!

One God, creator of the universe, the earth and every living thing. Evolution is a concept by simpletons who can't understand the complexities of life.

 

[MrDVS1]

Bacon, Newton, Galilleo, Darwin even, all believed in God..

Like anyone in the public eye had a choice back then. The Church almost executed Galileo, he had to recant and say the Sun revolved around the Earth

 

[Hollie]

Bacon, Newton, Galilleo, Darwin even, all believed in God.

Hollie, creationism of 6,000 years is flatly wrong, wildly so.

Christians who have comfort in their God have no trouble with faith and science.

Some do, some don't. I'm not aware that you have been tasked with speaking on behalf of christiandom.

 

[Hollie]

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Actually we have real concrete evidence for evolution, show us the concrete evidence for creationism !

Even Darwin said to prove evolution you need to find the missing link, that hasn't happened. Evolution within the species yes, but from an ape to man or single cell organism to a man is far fetched and unprovable.

The "missing link" thing was abandoned by paleontologists back in the 1950's, I believe.

I really don't have the words to express how someone who is as educated as a history professor can just turn their brains off and accept Creationism as anywhere close to a valid account of anything, much less use it as part of a classroom discussion (beyond mentioning it in context with religious beliefs of historical groups). Sadly, it isn't just historians who do this as there are scientists who do the same thing, but at least they'll admit when pushed that they know what the evidence they are ignoring is and that they simply can't believe the evidence because it conflicts with their world view.

Creationism makes more sense than the theory of evolution.

Nonsense.

 

[Hollie]

Not too many weathermen being burned at the stake these days for predicting a solar eclipse.

Let's ask Dr. James Watson, Dr. Jason Richwine, Dr. Helmuth Nyborg, Dr. Bjørn Lomborg, Dr. Larry Summers what happens when the "church" capos make you an offer you can't refuse.

Fortunately, the church has had to revise its position on science as it has had to revise its position on many things. The glaring light of open investigation has stripped the church of its once formidable arsenal of fear and intimidation, capice?

That formidable arsenal of fear and intimidation has now been taken over by liberals, capisce? So why are you tilting at windmills by focusing on religion instead of battling the close-minded enforcers of liberalism?

Because we have closed-minded christian fundamentalists trying to force their ID'iot agenda in the classroom.