• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Creationist are Liars"...? When they Steamroll Darwinian Evolution

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I don't agree with being dishonest, to support a belief. i see that going on both sides.
I'm still looking for the part where you recognize that Mr Armitage is the one lying here, not the scientists or the university.
He did not win a lawsuit or steamroller evolution.
Is that correct or not?
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I don't agree with being dishonest, to support a belief. i see that going on both sides.
Where in your OP do you see that going on "on both sides"?.
I am seeing a Christian lying.

And I am seeing you repost his lies. He did not win a lawsuit and he didn't steamroller evolution.

I see that as extremely similar to you reposting the Gospels, as though they are true.
Tom
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I too see no conflict with science and religion, and if indeed I do find that this Mark character was dishonest, i surely would not support that. Dishonesty is rampant.

I usually spend much time researching a topic before posting, but I guess I took this one a bit casual.

I believe we should make the choice to go where the evidence leads.
I don't find any evidence for Darwinian evolution.
If you do, then you obviously won't be the first, nor last.
Take care.
Perhaps you should learn what is and what is not evidence. To deny there is evidence tells us that you do not understand the concept. Would you care to learn so that you do not repeat this error?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I too see no conflict with science and religion, and if indeed I do find that this Mark character was dishonest, i surely would not support that. Dishonesty is rampant.

I usually spend much time researching a topic before posting, but I guess I took this one a bit casual.

I believe we should make the choice to go where the evidence leads.
I don't find any evidence for Darwinian evolution.
If you do, then you obviously won't be the first, nor last.
Take care.
I wouldn't say Armitage was dishonest, just deluded. He likely honestly believe's his YEC, and honestly believes he was discriminated against.
As for 'Darwinian evolution, (what is 'Darwinian evolution', anyway?) The evidence is overwhelming and growing every day. There is consilient evidence from numerous different disciplines. How are you not aware of this?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Hah. I had to stop at the top of the second page when he says "this covers, in a nutshell...":)

What? Is that inappropriate language for a thesis? Spelling errors abound in that work as well. It was not even written at a high school level, but then that matches Kent Hovind's science education. I have watched videos where people genuinely try to help him to understand basic scientific concepts and it is painful. Complex ones are totally beyond his ken.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
I wouldn't say Armitage was dishonest, just deluded. He likely honestly believe's his YEC, and honestly believes he was discriminated against.
As for 'Darwinian evolution, (what is 'Darwinian evolution', anyway?) The evidence is overwhelming and growing every day. There is consilient evidence from numerous different disciplines. How are you not aware of this?
I've been through that before.
 

Regiomontanus

Ματαιοδοξία ματαιοδοξιών! Όλα είναι ματαιοδοξία.
I too see no conflict with science and religion, and if indeed I do find that this Mark character was dishonest, i surely would not support that. Dishonesty is rampant.

I usually spend much time researching a topic before posting, but I guess I took this one a bit casual.

I believe we should make the choice to go where the evidence leads.
I don't find any evidence for Darwinian evolution.
If you do, then you obviously won't be the first, nor last.
Take care.

Hello. Might I recommend a book to you, one from a repected biologist and a Christian?

The Language of God - Wikipedia
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Where in your OP do you see that going on "on both sides"?.
I am seeing a Christian lying.

And I am seeing you repost his lies. He did not win a lawsuit and he didn't steamroller evolution.

I see that as extremely similar to you reposting the Gospels, as though they are true.
Tom
From my digging further into this, I find Mr. Armitage's story appears to be verified.

After settlement, academia still opposes creationist - Science & Tech - WORLD
Armitage published his paper in the journal Acta Histochemica but he did not mention his thoughts on the age of the specimen or his belief in a young earth. He showed the tissue samples to some of his students and engaged them in discussion about the age of the fossil. Soon after, according to the lawsuit, his supervisor stormed into the lab and shouted, “We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department.” A few days later, the university fired him.

Even though the school denied religious discrimination and said it lacked funds to continue his position, they settled with Armitage in late 2016 for $399,500, according to Inside Higher Ed. The university said the settlement was not an admission of guilt.

“The decision to settle was based on a desire to avoid the costs involved in a protracted legal battle, including manpower, time, and state dollars,” CSUN spokeswoman Carmen Ramos Chandler said in an email to The Sundial, the university’s student newspaper.

But, Alan Reinach, Armitage’s attorney, said university officials’ willingness to settle with such a large sum of money indicated they believed they would lose the case if it went to court. “The state doesn’t put large, six-figure settlement money out unless they are really concerned they are going to lose,” he told the College Fix.
Although he won the settlement, Armitage reports the discrimination hasn’t stopped. Since the university fired him, he has discovered additional soft tissue in fossils on two different digs, but he cannot find a journal willing to publish his papers. “I’m clearly being blackballed,” he said.

Despite the ongoing discrimination, Reinach called the case an unusual win for creationism: “We are not aware of any other cases where a creationist has received a favorable outcome. This was truly a historic case.”

Paper
Soft sheets of fibrillar bone from a fossil of the supraorbital horn of the dinosaur Triceratops horridus

Lawsuit
https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/armitage-complaint.pdf


I therefore find no fault in the man, and I believe he was paid out to avoid the widespread publicity, and the imminent loss of the case by CSUN, as Armitage’s attorney, said.

Mr Armitage is a microscopist for thirty years, according to the document.

Even opposers do not deny this.
Expelled Professor and Microscopist Mark Armitage Responds to his Critics

I wash my hands of this man's blood. You see to it.
Matthew 27:24
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
From my digging further into this, I find Mr. Armitage's story appears to be verified.

After settlement, academia still opposes creationist - Science & Tech - WORLD
Armitage published his paper in the journal Acta Histochemica but he did not mention his thoughts on the age of the specimen or his belief in a young earth. He showed the tissue samples to some of his students and engaged them in discussion about the age of the fossil. Soon after, according to the lawsuit, his supervisor stormed into the lab and shouted, “We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department.” A few days later, the university fired him.

Try to find a valid source. And since Armitage was spreading disinformation didn't the university have a right to fire him?

Even though the school denied religious discrimination and said it lacked funds to continue his position, they settled with Armitage in late 2016 for $399,500, according to Inside Higher Ed. The university said the settlement was not an admission of guilt.

Correct. The lawsuit itself could easily have cost the school that much money. Rather than relying on a jury, that could easily come to the wrong verdict they paid him roughly what the case would have cost them even if they won.

“The decision to settle was based on a desire to avoid the costs involved in a protracted legal battle, including manpower, time, and state dollars,” CSUN spokeswoman Carmen Ramos Chandler said in an email to The Sundial, the university’s student newspaper.

And there you go.

But, Alan Reinach, Armitage’s attorney, said university officials’ willingness to settle with such a large sum of money indicated they believed they would lose the case if it went to court. “The state doesn’t put large, six-figure settlement money out unless they are really concerned they are going to lose,” he told the College Fix.
Although he won the settlement, Armitage reports the discrimination hasn’t stopped. Since the university fired him, he has discovered additional soft tissue in fossils on two different digs, but he cannot find a journal willing to publish his papers. “I’m clearly being blackballed,” he said.

Why has he not found a creationist source that would publish these supposedly "black balled" works? If the science is valid that would be a first for creationists. But odds are that the work he wrote has too many unsupported claims, if he tried to work creationism into his work. His one published piece does not have creationist claims in it. He was afraid to publish his true beleifs.

Despite the ongoing discrimination, Reinach called the case an unusual win for creationism: “We are not aware of any other cases where a creationist has received a favorable outcome. This was truly a historic case.”

Paper
Soft sheets of fibrillar bone from a fossil of the supraorbital horn of the dinosaur Triceratops horridus

Lawsuit
https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/armitage-complaint.pdf


I therefore find no fault in the man, and I believe he was paid out to avoid the widespread publicity, and the imminent loss of the case by CSUN, as Armitage’s attorney, said.

Mr Armitage is a microscopist for thirty years, according to the document.

Even opposers do not deny this.
Expelled Professor and Microscopist Mark Armitage Responds to his Critics

I wash my hands of this man's blood. You see to it.
Matthew 27:24

And you were doing so well earlier when you admitted that the man was dishonest. Cognitive dissonance strikes again. Once again, lawsuits are expensive. The university could easily have spent $400,000.00 dollars on that suit and there was a small possibility that they would have lost. Juries have been wrong in such lawsuits in the past. By the way, your last source was biased too. Don't you know how to vet your sources? You can't use a dishonest source and claim that it accurately tells the story of those that oppose a liar.
 

Regiomontanus

Ματαιοδοξία ματαιοδοξιών! Όλα είναι ματαιοδοξία.
Thanks, but I don't see how the contents in this book can be more convincing than any scientific data. I'll give it a look if I have the time.

Hello. Well the reason I suggested it is because it was the science (of genetics & biology) that eventually led him to Christ.

Be well.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I ouldn't expect a school's history department to employ a holocaust denier, or it's astronomy department a geocentrist. Why would a scientific organization employ a YEC in a position that involves teaching?
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
From my digging further into this, I find Mr. Armitage's story appears to be verified.
Where did your Christian "win a lawsuit"?
He didn't.

This is why I know better than to trust a Christian. They will say things that are demonstrably false.

Armitage didn't win a lawsuit and he didn't steamroller evolution. You just can't tell the difference between truth and Faith. You have Faith that this happened, even though it didn't.
Tom
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Hello. Well the reason I suggested it is because it was the science (of genetics & biology) that eventually led him to Christ.

Be well.
Yes. I know this. A few of my brothers had the same experience.
Some were atheist and agnostic.
Anthony Flew had a similar experience.
The relationship between science and religion was never at odds.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Where did your Christian "win a lawsuit"?
He didn't.

This is why I know better than to trust a Christian. They will say things that are demonstrably false.

Armitage didn't win a lawsuit and he didn't steamroller evolution. You just can't tell the difference between truth and Faith. You have Faith that this happened, even though it didn't.
Tom
Did the man file a lawsuit?
Did he lose?

If I filed a lawsuit, and I went to court, and those whom I filed the lawsuit against, agreed to settle it by paying me buns, I consider that a win, and I think a reasonable person would consider me dishonest, if I said I won. I didn't lose.
Case closed.

With regard to steamrolling evolution, I don't believe I heard Mr Armitage say anything about that. Did you?
As far as I know, that was part of the title of the thread I created.
I think if you have a problem with that, you should take it up with me, and not Mr Armitage.

I think the man is being honest.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Did the man file a lawsuit?
Did he lose?

If I filed a lawsuit, and I went to court, and those whom I filed the lawsuit against, agreed to settle it by paying me buns, I consider that a win, and I think a reasonable person would consider me dishonest, if I said I won. I didn't lose.
Case closed.

With regard to steamrolling evolution, I don't believe I heard Mr Armitage say anything about that. Did you?
As far as I know, that was part of the title of the thread I created.
I think if you have a problem with that, you should take it up with me, and not Mr Armitage.

I think the man is being honest.
You are being dishonest here. An out of court settlement of a case is not a "win", because the arguments were never tested in court. Any lawyer will tell you that.

And you created the thread title, including the phrase "steamroll Darwinian evolution" to paint an entirely false picture of this story.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
You are being dishonest here. An out of court settlement of a case is not a "win", because the arguments were never tested in court. Any lawyer will tell you that.

And you created the thread title, including the phrase "steamroll Darwinian evolution" to paint an entirely false picture of this story.
Can you prove that I am being dishonest?
How would you like if I said you are a lier?
Would that be nice of me?
 
Top