Kurt Wise - A YAC and an old earth evolutionist?

I am a former student of Dr. Wise.He is a lot easier to understand if you really listen to what he says. From what I know of him, he is not an old earth evolutionist, but a man of faith. He believes God created the world in 6 literal days, but he isnt going to lie and say that the evidence of the earth supports this view, at least not unless you start with different assumptions.I dont know much about the nitty gritty arguments that you are tossing back and forth, but I do know enough about Kurt Wise to know that he is honest, he is a young earth creationist, and he is a heck of a good scientist. I wish I had my class notes in a form that I could upload and link to you all so you could read for yourself.

Do you believe that its impossible for a good person to be wrong about something? Or do you believe that being faithful precludes any possibility of being mistaken?

no, and no.why would you think that?

Because that seems to be the basis from which you've advanced support of Wise's position - "I know him, he's a good guy, therefore he's probably right."It seems to me that it's the evidence that matters; barring that, lacking the capacity to judge the evidence, shouldn't you go with the consensus scientific view? Is Wise with, or against, that consensus?

dear crashfrog,I dont lack the capacity to judge the evidence. I am not stupid, I just have not spent enough time on the material yet. I may yet do it someday, I am still fairly young.That said, I also dont want to blindly subscribe to the consensus. Just because something is popular doesnt mean it is right. And as you suggest, just because a man is righteous it does not follow that he is right.But I think you may have misunderstood my message. I noticed that a few people had called Professor Wise "insane" or made derogatory remarks about him because they didnt agree with him. I couldnt sit by and let that happen when I know otherwise.Do you understand now? I have met the man, listened to his theories, sat in his classroom, and seen the work he has done, and I believe him to be not only quite sane, but much more true to the evidence than many other creationists. It's unfair of people who dont know anything about him (or his work) to make broad overarching statements saying that he's stupid.I really had to reply to these posts because from what I know, Dr. Wise is brilliant. He is easily one of the most intelligent people I sat under during my college career, and he is a proficient scientist, however unconventional. I am not making an assertion as to whether or not he is correct about overarching theories, but I can guarantee from firsthand experience that his science is DONE correctly.Now, if someone wanted to complain about his singing I might agree...

Sure. At such time as you're capable of assessing the evidence, you're free to come to your own conclusion, based on the evidence, of what the proper conclusion is.But by your own admission you aren't at that point. So what's your rationale for dismissing the consensus of people who are capable of assessing the evidence? But you yourself aren't able to assess his conclusions, as you've admitted. Who are you to determine if he's an idiot or not? But you've already admitted that you don't have the expertise or knowledge to make such a guarantee.

hmm... I can tell now all you're interested in is disagreeing. This is exactly why I dont like to join forums like these. Nobody wants to listen, everybody wants to mudsling and have the last say.I cant sing like Luciano Pavarotti, but I can sure tell he does it right.

Actually you only can if you have some reasonable musical talent. I have friends in choirs and they have trained ears which can hear errors I can not.We are, in addtion, to different degrees all born with some sense of music and tone (I with less than most) but we are not born with what is needed to analyze this kind of thing.If you can "tell" about this you have to be able to describe what is going on you don't have a sense which can "listen" to it. Your analogy is invalid because of the differences.

I disagree.The knowledge I have of singing comes from having done a little bit of it, as well as having ears to hear.I have also done a little bit of science. I can tell to some degree whether or not science is done correctly. If I didnt have a sense to understand science, then I couldnt even do a little of it.Not many people know how to do rocket science, but they can tell the NASA liftoff on the 4th was a success.I dont understand why you dont just believe me. It seems like all you want to do is fight. I dont want to debate with you, just convince you. Dont you want to agree? You and crashfrog seem like you should join a debate team. Maybe I dont belong on these forums if I just want to have a real conversation.

They also thought the liftoff of the colombia was a success.The liftoff of the colombia is what doomed it though.Science is not music. It is not 'taste'. The standards are a lot stricter than for how music is done.There is this 'spin off' of science that is called 'psuedo-science'. The practitioners of this use scientific terms, make claim that sounds scientific, and claim evididence that alledges to back up their beliefs.
The evidence does not match what the claims are. The claims all match a predetermined bias on the part of the 'researcher', who does not present the evidence to peer review. It looks oh so scientific to the layman, but it is not. Do you think you can distinguish between the practitioners of psuedoscience from the real thing?

Would you "just believe me" if I said I was Kurt Wise's butler and I have seen him sacrificing virgins to Satan? Do you make a habit of "just believing" everything you read on the Internet? How can you expect to "convince" anybody without a reasoned argument? Can you at least show us some of the science that Wise has done? Can you give us anything besides your personal assurance? This is a debate forum, after all. If you just want a conversation, you can go to the Coffee House and talk about your favourite music. But don't expect to come on here and say, "I'm right and you're wrong", and not get an argument.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I have no idea who you are. I've never met you. I have no knowledge of your motivations, your morals, or your capacity for dishonesty or deceit. In every possible way you're an unknown to me. Why would any of us "just believe you" about anything?If you want us to believe you about things, you have to provide evidence. Agree with you? If the positions you hold are wrong, why would we want to agree with those things? I think the question here is - why don't you just believe us? Why don't you just agree with us?Can you think of any answers to those two questions that we couldn't apply equally to you?

yOUR second para-graph seems to express my own guess on who Wise was.Drawing on the move from a free to a pure will the practicality of, Wises' wiseiness, relates, seems to me to a transition between the reflective and the determinative judgement. So when it comes to data it can not be reflectively objectionable in any way, aka as to some comments in this thread, but if the determinative judgement preceedes the TIME taken in reflection prior to the facts garnered , no matter how gained, there can be an error. Using a biased glass to see that grass will never have a chance explanation without a design does not fall into this category. I am not a student of wISE is Izzz can not say that did not fall here but I would doubt it. I think what you indicated is close enough to truth for soverign work.

EvC Forum: Reasons for Creationist Persistence, by Dr Adequate.Quoted in its entirety: There's also a bit more "things Kurt Wise" upthread.Moose

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment. "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

​

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith

​

"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

Garrett, here, trotted out the big list of YEC scientists. Included on that list was Kurt Wise.Now, in my brief review of Garrett's messages, I get mixed impressions on whether he is a YEC or not. My tentative conclusion is that he is NOT a YEC, but likes to discuss things from a YEC perspective.Anyhow, that was one of my reasons to bump this topic. The other was the following: Sadly, an Honest Creationist by Richard Dawkins.It includes:

quote:

---

Wise stands out among young earth creationists not only for his impeccable education, but because he displays a modicum of scientific honesty and integrity. I have seen a published letter in which he comments on alleged “human bones” in Carboniferous coal deposits. If authenticated as human, these “bones” would blow the theory of evolution out of the water (incidentally giving lie to the canard that evolution is unfalsifiable and therefore unscientific...

---

and

quote:

---

Unusually among the motley denizens of the “big tent” of creationism and intelligent design, he seems to accept that God needs no help from false witness.

---

Also much more, some of which has been touched upon upthread.Moose

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment. "Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

​

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith

​

"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose