Jose Fly
Fisker of men
I'm 50 years old, which means I've seen how creationism has evolved (HAH) over the last several decades. I can remember elementary school in the 1970's where teaching Christianity and the Bible in a public school was just assumed and there was little if any controversy. I remember in 4th grade us doing a skit about a newspaper reporter doing interviews right before Noah's flood. I remember in middle school and high school us not covering evolution in science classes because (according to the teachers) it was "too controversial" and some of them specifically saying that since it contradicted the Bible, it was necessarily wrong. I even remember in high school a couple of mandatory assemblies where "scientific creationists" would give presentations on young-earth creationism and how "true science" supported it.
As I was finishing up college the ID creationism movement was just beginning and by the time I started working it was getting a fair bit of interest from the media. Of course ID creationism died a quick death in the Dover, PA trial in 2005.
So over my lifetime, I've seen creationism go from overtly teaching "this is what the Bible says so it's true", to "the accounts in the Bible are scientifically supported", to "teach the controversy", to "complexity = a designer", to it's current state.
And what is its current state? Judging by the consistent theme I see from creationists in this and other forums, it seems to have been reduced to the rather simplistic argument of "challenge evolutionists to prove their claims to a 100% degree of certainty, and when they don't do that declare it to be a faith, no different than any other belief system".
That appears to be it. I've honestly not seen much of anything else from creationists in quite a while. I think we science advocates should take this as a positive development. This really is all they have left, which means the current declining trend is very likely to continue.
As I was finishing up college the ID creationism movement was just beginning and by the time I started working it was getting a fair bit of interest from the media. Of course ID creationism died a quick death in the Dover, PA trial in 2005.
So over my lifetime, I've seen creationism go from overtly teaching "this is what the Bible says so it's true", to "the accounts in the Bible are scientifically supported", to "teach the controversy", to "complexity = a designer", to it's current state.
And what is its current state? Judging by the consistent theme I see from creationists in this and other forums, it seems to have been reduced to the rather simplistic argument of "challenge evolutionists to prove their claims to a 100% degree of certainty, and when they don't do that declare it to be a faith, no different than any other belief system".
That appears to be it. I've honestly not seen much of anything else from creationists in quite a while. I think we science advocates should take this as a positive development. This really is all they have left, which means the current declining trend is very likely to continue.
The Bible tells me so
