Evidence for a Conspiracy of Scientists?

If you want to understand why creationists often voice the concern that there is an overarching conspiracy of atheist scientists, then you have to put yourself in their shoes and walk for a mile. Simple as that.Chances are that most non-creationists can't or won't do that. So I will do it for you.Remember first that, as a creationist, they believe in God. That also means they believe in the devil as an entity. Scripture says the devil is at work in the world...and can influence the world from the spiritual realm. The goals of the devil are to a) lead the believers away from God and b) keep the unbelievers from believing in God.So when a creationist percieves an agenda that seems to accomodate the goals of the devil, or encounters bias in the schools, in the media, and in the laboratory he/she is likely to chalk it up to a common cause. The simplest explanation for a common cause, in thier mind, is the devil influencing events through mortal pawns.I think it is a logical conclusion from their point of view. However, I think a more likely explanation for the conspiracy is the bias and bigotry we all have as humans.This message has been edited by Limbo, 04-29-2005 07:38 PMThis message has been edited by Limbo, 04-29-2005 08:35 PM

Thanks for pointing out my mistake. I've edited my post to correct it.

Hmm. Well, I think it depends alot on how much they know about the bible. If they know enough to know that there is nothing in there against polyester and cotton (or whatever) blend trousers (which there isn't) then they won't percieve a threat to their worldview.As to your 'why only do some of the things that it tells you to do' question...this also relates to how much they know. The majority of the bible is the old testament, right? Well, when Christ died he 'tore the veil', placing Christians under grace, NOT under the law of the old testament. So believers don't have to go around obeying all the hundreds of little things in the O.T.Living like a Christian isn't as hard and rigid and "churchy" as people like to think. Christ said that if something is evil to YOU, then it would be evil for you to do it.For instance, if someones religion says they can't eat a particular food because it is unclean, and they truly believe it, then they would be going againt their conscience to eat it...so by eating it they commited evil against themselves. However, someone else who believes its allright to eat that food would not go against their conscience to eat it, so eating it would not be an evil against themselves. IOW, there is alot of lee-way for the independant-minded Christian.Christ said its not what goes into the mouth that makes one unclean, its what comes out (words)The thing to remember about creationists is they are just trying to defend thier worldview. We ALL have a worldview, and we are ALL biased against other worldviews that threaten ours.This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-01-2005 10:09 AM

quote:

---

Actually, it's Wool blend and it is an abomination. It most certainly is in there.

---

If its in the old testament, then as I said Christ tore that veil. Christians aren't bound to old testament law. If it's in the new testament...what book and verse is it?Here is an example of what I would call bias and bigotry in the scientific community:The Branding of a Heretic
Are religious scientists unwelcome at the Smithsonian?
BY DAVID KLINGHOFFER
Friday, January 28, 2005 12:01 a.m. ESTGet The Wall Street Journal’s Opinion columnists, editorials, op-eds, letters to the editor, and book and arts reviews.

quote:

---

Sorry but that is a totally unsupported assertion. Do you think that when Jesus, Paul, Peter, Luke, Mark, Matthew, John, Mary, or Thomas spoke of scripture they were speaking of the New Testament? If so, perhaps you could explain?

​

And you've brought up the DAVID KLINGHOFFER example before. It's crap and whining. Enough of these old cry-baby stories, bring us some NEW cry-baby stories.

---

I'm afraid you are suffering from a fundamental misconception of Christianity: the difference between Law and Grace.The old covenant was for the Jews only. For one to be under the Old covenant they need to convert to Judaism. In the new covenant, it is for both Jews and gentiles. In Eph.2 when we believe in Christ we becomes part of the body of Christ, not Judaism. God made a whole new entity called the church, the body of Christ, and filled it with his spirit to operate in his ways.And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed His last. And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom (Mark 15:37-38)What is the relationship of law to grace and how do we reconcile the commands in the OT law with grace. So many say the grace is there to keep the law, but the bible states in the NT that if you fail to keep one of the laws you have broken them all.This is the very reason we are under grace. In the OT there was grace under the surface of the law in the NT grace rules over the law. If you failed in one of the commands the way it was dealt with was by sacrifice. The NT we are not under grace to keep the law of the OT because the scripture makes it clear no one can. It is Jesus who kept the law where we could not he kept it absolutely perfectly.Every requirement small or large was kept by Christ. So Christ lived a perfect righteous life even to the point of his death on the cross. We are under grace because of his righteousness that is imputed or given to our account.So many people misunderstand which covenant they are living under and because of this there is so much confusion that they get condemned because they have not lived up to the perfect standard the law requires.Paul states in Rom. 6:14..." for you are not under law but under grace." He also makes it clear in Gal. 5:18 "if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law."This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-01-2005 03:41 PM

In a debate, the side which displays the most bigotry, hate, intolerance, ridicule, and anger is usually the loosing side. The side with something to hide (from the general public)Everywhere I look I see anti-ID hate. Hate is a reaction to fear. Why are they afraid?Fear is the mind-killer. Examine yourself. Discover your subconscious fear. Discover your hidden bias. Then maybe you can release yourself from the intellectual strangle-hold the scientific elite have on you.This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-01-2005 10:06 PM

I appreciate the tremendous strides science has made. There is no doubt about the benefits to mankind as a result of science.Having said that, I’ve seen TONS of blogs, forum posts, articles, and court rulings that go far beyond being critical of the ideas behind ID to committing outright ad hominems and cheap, junior high pot shots.It seems that in some circles, saying a positive word about ID would be like claiming to be pro-Bush at a New York Times editorial staff meeting. For many, the very term ‘intelligent design’ evokes disdain, disgust, and borders on contempt. For some, it actually crosses over into contempt. Being anti-ID is almost like, well, a religious movement.If only the scientific community would do a better job of explaining to the public at large how science works, and the limitations of the scientific method, the alleged antagonism between science and religion would dissipate.The problem is not public ignorance, but public alienation. The reason for this alienation is the reluctance of most scientists to be as objective about themselves, their values, their goals, and their intellectual methods as they claim to be about interpreting specific data.For a variety of reasons...a litany of grievances that is so commonplace it need not be repeated here...a significant part of the general public has become distrustful of those goals, values and methods.If they are valid today, they need new validation and not simply reassertion. If they are superstitions, i.e., obsolete assumptions, left over from the recent past of science, they need rejection or revision. And the discussion of all this must be public, else it will carry no conviction to the people who provide the support for science.Then maybe the perception of 'conspiracy' would dissapear.

quote:

---

Scientists fear that if ID or Creationism is thought of as scientific then standards of science would degrade considerably.

---

The vast majority of scientific advances throughout history have been made under the belief that there is a God. Your point is moot.What they REALLY fear is that if there is ANY validity to the belief in a creator, they will have to change their sinful lifestyle, recognize an authority, and abandon their god-less worldview.This is the real reason they oppose ID.This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-02-2005 12:26 PM

quote:

---

And there I was thinking that ID didn't actually specify that God was the designer.
Shows how much I know eh?

---

It doesn't. But lets face it, when a secular scientist hears about ID what they think they hear is modern creationism. Creationism = God.This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-02-2005 02:10 PM

quote:

---

The big reason that none of your posts have been taken seriously is that they have been absurd. You provide no evidence, you make woefully uninformed statemnts like the above quote, and when challenged to support your assertions you retreat into innuendo.

---

I really couldnt care less if your type takes my posts seriously. I dont expect you to...your mind is too closed. I say what I come to say, and thats that. You think I have time to personally address each and every point that all of you bring up? There is only one of me. Go and do your own damn research, determine for yourself if what I say is true. Its not my job to hold your hand.This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-02-2005 02:08 PM

Sorry double post.This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-02-2005 02:36 PM

quote:

---

We have. What you say is not true.

​

I really feel your Christian love here ...

---

Oh really? You all have? lol. Where is your evidence? Lets see it.And you really feel my Christian love eh? Do you feel my Christian anger too? Because its ok for good to be angry at evil, ya'know. Its called righteous anger. Its ok to be angry at closed-minded, rude, lying, hypocritical bigots.Its funny how you non-Christians always want OTHER people to live up to moral codes (like Christianity) that you yourself don't observe.This message has been edited by Limbo, 05-02-2005 02:42 PM

quote:

---

ID=Creationism=Bullshit.

---

Thanks for prooving my point, bigot!