The Role of Bias In the Origins Debate

1. The Role of Bias In the Origins Debate By Brian Forbeshttp://FromNoahtoHercules.com

2. Early in my adulthood, I had a friend from my church who went to my school; he and I were both committed young earth creationists.

3. We both liked to read. We both liked to learn.

4. He seemed to me to have a slight edge on his past reading.I valued his input as a scholar.

5. As we talked one day, he told me that educated Creationists made him mad, that they were liars. I listened in shock.

6. I still had a lot to learn.

7. The impression I had was that the more a man learned, the more he accepted evolution and rejected ancient superstitions. It seemed to me that the claim that “all real scientists believe in evolution” was based in truth.

8. I had a nagging question in the back of my mind: If most of the scientists 200 years ago were all Biblical Creationists, why did evolution take center stage in the modern academic world?

9. I knew that acceptance of the Theory of Evolution is also a rejection of the historical account of Adam and Eve. I knew that if I started cutting out the various accounts of scripture, it wouldn't be long before I doubted all of scripture.

10. I wasn't in a good place to doubt God, so I avoided the topic.

11. For years, I held the position that scripture might be true, but the evidence probably contradicted it.

12. During this time, however, I was praying. I was looking at the New Testament scriptures, especially the Gospels. I devoted myself to sermons and music that allowed me to worship my Maker. I was growing.

13. My unsure foundation became exposed in private conversations with my wife. She began to pray for me.

14. My home group went to the ICR museum, (now the Creation & Earth History Museum)and a few of the questions I had were answered.

15. The next week, I really began to look into the science. The more I saw, the more I got excited about YEC.

16. After years of study, and trying to keep an open mind, I've settled into my position. I find it highly doubtful that any atheist could ever convert me from my conviction that God is real and the Earth started a normal week before Adam was formed out of dirt.

17. It may seem at first glance that I was convinced by the evidence. Although I think that is true in part, I do not think that is the entire story.

18. I do NOT aim to present here that the evidence is on the side of Creation.

19. It is, but that's beside the point.

20. I aim to show that any evidence presented to us will invariably take a back seat to the fertility of the soil in our hearts.

21. It is our bias that determines what we are able to see and accept for evidence.

22. Bias defined: An emotional inclination to a particular view. Bias will often influence how you accept or reject evidence.

23. Any position that has allowed for human evaluation will include bias.

24. The question is not if there is bias. The question is what does your bias support. …and I can prove it.

25. The question is not if there is bias. The question is what does your bias support. …and I can prove it.(I think…)

26. Science is supposed to be based in objectivity - raw facts that lead to unemotional conclusions.

27. The scientific method can be traced through:René Descartes – who rid his mind of all bias Francis Bacon – who described science in terms of cause and effect (experiments)Karl Popper – falsifiabilityThey defined how we can know things without appealing to feeling.They set limits for “science” or knowledge.

28. If it ain’t falsifiable, it ain’t science.

29. Science works like Mathematics Both work great if: Your equation is correct Your logic is sound Your variables are accurate Your experiments and assumptions are solid You’re not missing something Like thrust in Newton’s gravity Like spiritual and unrepeatable events

30. Science works like Mathematics Let’s assume that you can measure a man’s weight by his height. http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

31. See BMI (body mass index) for a better ratio Science works like Mathematics If you input the proper variables, you will get the same answer every time. A 6’-0” man is 72” tall. A 180 lb weight is normal. A 5’-0” woman is 60” tall. A 150 lb weight is normal. Let’s assume that you can measure a man’s weight by his height. http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

32. See BMI (body mass index) for a better ratio Science works like Mathematics If you input the proper variables, you will get the same answer every time. A 6’-0” man is 72” tall. A 180 lb weight is normal. A 5’-0” woman is 60” tall. A 150 lb weight is normal. You will likely notice that we are assuming inches and lbs. 182 mm (72”) would be 455 kg (1000 lbs)The equation only works in inches and lbs. Let’s assume that you can measure a man’s weight by his height. http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

33. See BMI (body mass index) for a better ratio Science works like Mathematics If you input the proper variables, you will get the same answer every time. A 6’-0” man is 72” tall. A 180 lb weight is normal. A 5’-0” woman is 60” tall. A 150 lb weight is normal. You will likely notice that we are assuming inches and lbs. 182 mm (72”) would be 455 kg (1000 lbs)The equation only works in inches and lbs. Let’s assume that you can measure a man’s weight by his height. It will be obvious to most that there are assumptions in my equation. The ratio of height to weight isn’t constant in real life. (12” baby = 30 lbs) http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

34. See BMI (body mass index) for a better ratio Science works like Mathematics If you input the proper variables, you will get the same answer every time. A 6’-0” man is 72” tall. A 180 lb weight is normal. A 5’-0” woman is 60” tall. A 150 lb weight is normal. You will likely notice that we are assuming inches and lbs. 182 mm (72”) would be 455 kg (1000 lbs)The equation only works in inches and lbs. Let’s assume that you can measure a man’s weight by his height. It will be obvious to most that there are assumptions in my equation. The ratio of height to weight isn’t constant in real life. (12” baby = 30 lbs) Assuming this works in all cases (fat, muscular, missing limbs) would result in wrong conclusions! http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

35. See BMI (body mass index) for a better ratio Science works like Mathematics If you input the proper variables, you will get the same answer every time. A 6’-0” man is 72” tall. A 180 lb weight is normal. A 5’-0” woman is 60” tall. A 150 lb weight is normal. You will likely notice that we are assuming inches and lbs. 182 mm (72”) would be 455 kg (1000 lbs)The equation only works in inches and lbs. Let’s assume that you can measure a man’s weight by his height. It will be obvious to most that there are assumptions in my equation. The ratio of height to weight isn’t constant in real life. (12” baby = 30 lbs) Wrong assumptions can be worse than inaccurate experimental data. http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

36. Science isn’t the only source of knowledge. If science is not used cautiously, it can be very unreliable.

37. Scientists have been wrong in the past.

38. We were obviously wrong with these! Blood letting – This probably killed George WashingtonWashing hands – this revolutionized surgery, thanks to Dr. Joseph Lister.Spontaneous generation – Francesco Redi showed that flies do not come from rotting meat.

39. I have some serious questions about modern science too.

40. I have some serious questions about modern science too. Keep in mind that I don’t know very much about physics.

41. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravity:

42. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravitational force gets exponentially weaker every time distance is doubled. Gravity:

43. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravitational force gets exponentially weaker every time distance is doubled. Gravity: It likewise gets exponentially stronger in massive objects

44. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravitational force gets exponentially weaker every time distance is doubled. Gravity: It likewise gets exponentially stronger in massive objects If a black hole (large mass) won’t let light (small mass) escape, what kind of explosion could allow escape from the singularity before the big bang?

45. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravitational force gets exponentially weaker every time distance is doubled. Gravity: It likewise gets exponentially stronger in massive objects (a very big one!) If a black hole (large mass) won’t let light (small mass) escape, what kind of explosion could allow escape from the singularity before the big bang? If Mars and the moon can’t hold gasses to their surface, How could swirling gas (very low mass) come together to form a star?

46. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravitational force gets exponentially weaker every time distance is doubled. Gravity: It likewise gets exponentially stronger in massive objects If a black hole (large mass) won’t let light (small mass) escape, what kind of explosion could allow escape from the singularity before the big bang? If Mars and the moon can’t hold gasses to their surface, How could swirling gas (very low mass) come together to form a star? Can gravity really hold galaxies together?

47. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravity: I have never even taken a physics class. I have no idea if this evaluation will stand up to scrutiny.

48. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravity: I have never even taken a physics class. I have no idea if this evaluation will stand up to scrutiny. It is my bias. I will assume my guesses are right until someone shows me that they’re wrong.

49. There seem to me to be problems in modern science Gravity: I have never even taken a physics class. I have no idea if this evaluation will stand up to scrutiny. It is my bias. I will assume my guesses are right until someone shows me that they’re wrong. I would rather be right, so I will defend my idea.

50. Learn a little Everyone does what I do.