PhDiocese??

[doubleaadogg]

In this New York Times Article about creationists earning degrees in science while still believing the earth is ten thousand years old the controversy of weather graduate biology and geosciences programs should admit applicants who's religious beliefs conflict with the accepted notions of that field. I wonder what people think of this notion.

Comments

[ticklemegrover]

If he doesn't want to write recommendations for people, he shouldn't have to.

And I know, that was definitely not the question you were asking.

[the_i_ching]

I agree with him. While science ought to be tolerant of divergent beliefs, these beliefs ought to come within the paradigm of the scientific method, which creationism certainly does not.

Creationism leaps to a ridiculous conclusion and twists the facts to suit its own ends. And it attacks not just the scientific consensus on human origins but also surrounding issues; for example, creationists don't believe in the accuracy of carbon dating, because it spits on what they believe.

Science doesn't owe religion a damned thing and shouldn't have to bend over backward to accomodate it. And if religious institutions want to exclude science, that's fine too. If we don't like their ridiculous anti-intellectual stance, we can always start our own damn religion.

Matt