Hovindism Bonus #2 Creationism in Academia

What happens when a creationist proposes his nonsense in the academic forum? Is he persecuted as creationists so often claim? Let's examine a recent example.

References
Javor GT. 2008. Evolution in the classroom. Microbe. 3(5):215.
Farrand SK. 2008. Creationism versus evolution. Microbe. 3(7):311.
Javor GT. 2006. LLU Faculty - George Javor Professional Activity. Accessed 21 August 2008. http://www.llu.edu/llu/faculty/gjavor/
Farrand SK. 2004. Stephen K. Farrand. Accessed 21 August 2008. http://www.life.uiuc.edu/micro/faculty/faculty_farrand.htm
Lomo Linda University Department of Security. 2008. LLUAHSC Security Handbook Homepage. Accessed 21 August 2008. http://lomalindahealth.org/medical-center/our-services/security/
Office of Equal Opportunity and Access. 2008. Office of Equal Opportunity and Access. Accessed 21 August 2008. http://www.eoa.uiuc.edu/

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Evolution
• Creationism
• Kent
• Hovind
• Creation
• Intelligent
• Design

[doogtoog]

That was rude, cockroaches aren't that bad. They would be offended to hear that they're being compared to creationists.

[TheTruePatriot72]

Lets not forget: Creationism: -Bananas fitting in the hand proves God -Its too complicated, it has to be God -Look, the Bible says so, it has to be God -Look, people are recovering from illnesses, it has to be God! Evolution: -99% of our genome is the same as the Chimpanzee -Geologic evidence suggests evolution -mutation and natural selection has been shown in the lab -archeology, paleontology, physics, chemistry, genetics, taxonomy all point to evolution I wonder what makes more sense...

[drfoxcourt]

@gregrutz I agree. Certainly Columbus established there was a continent there to be explored. Printable maps and books made that discovery a fact. Columbus had no notion of the extent of America and there was more to be discovered. You could say Vespuchi, Hudson, Verizanno are each discoverers with significant finds after Columbus.

I stand by my original statement, Columbus should be famous for locating and establishing an exploitation system that Pizzarro, Cortez et al used.

[gregrutz]

@drfoxcourt Columbus is not famous for being the first person to discover America, he is famous because he was the last... It didn't need to be discoverd any more after he discovered it.

[drfoxcourt]

Pythagoreans believed in Heliocentrism but had no evidence. Copernicus gets credit because he supplied evidence.

Columbus's fame should be that he discovered a wealth of resources which Europeans could & did exploit. Ericson prob came to the Americas, but did not exploit its resources.

As it is, Some native american ancestor "discovered" America long before literate civilizations, but we'll never know who, and probably not know when either.

Thanks for thinking critically.

[Campineiroamericano]

I think, although I may be wrong, that the United States is the only modern country in the world where there is such a strong movement to include creationism into public schools corriculums. I fear the day that happens, because we would be moving backwards in time. Remember the dark ages? Look today at the countries that were once the centers of knowledge, how backwards they are because of their devotion to their religion and their god.

[thegoochieguy]

@jaymthegenius

pythagoras today, is mentioned as discoverer

there may be a point to the latter statement.

[tctheunbeliever]

And of course the whole argument is irrelevant because it doesn't matter who believes in a theory, it's the evidence that counts. Millions of people CAN be wrong, no matter who they are.

What do you have against cockroaches?

[NoodlesTux]

At a guess it is because Latin was the language of academia in that time and that Copernicus is the Latinisation (?) of Kopernik. It's the name he would have used in publications.

I haven't actually checked any of this, so you may want to ;) just an educated guess.

[dragonofthedarknight]

Pythagoras was the first to come up with the idea of Heliocentricism, but I don't know if he gave enough support for his claim. If he didn't, maybe that's why Copernicus got the credit. Wikipedia says that he was first to " formulate a comprehensive heliocentric cosmology"

And I will never understand why everyone calls him Copernicus. Wasn't he Polish? His name is Kopernik, damnit! I don't get it why people always translate names. They just rename everything their own way, makes no sense.

[jaymthegenius]

Didn't Pythagoras discover Heliocentricism? Copernicus get's the credit for it of course because he was a Christian. It's like how Leaf Erikson or Zheng He didn't get credit for discovering America, but Columbus did in spite of traveling there later than them.

[jaymthegenius]

May I go on to add something here: Lucilio Vanini speculated on how man might have evolved from apes as early as the 17th century. And Anaxamander int he 6th century BCE had an evolutionary theory, although not nearly as refined as Darwins.