Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Wise

Kurt Patrick Wise is an American young earth creationist with a degree in paleontology from Harvard University where he studied under the supervision of Stephen Jay Gould.

Education and work history

Wise has a Ph.D. in Invertebrate Paleontology from Harvard University, an M.A. Geology from Harvard University and a B.A. Geology from the University of Chicago. Since August 2006 he has has taught at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary; he leads the school's Center for Theology and Science, a job in which he was preceded by intelligent design creationist William Dembski.[1][2] He had previously taught at Bryan College in Tennessee where he served as Director of Center for Origins Research and as an Associate Professor of Science.[1]

He served as scientific consultant to the Answers in Genesis's Creation Museum which opened in 2007.[3] Another scientist who had studied under Gould and knows Wise him "a less propaganda-oriented creationist" than Ken Ham, the leader of Answers in Genesis, and said that Wise's influence on the displays was apparent.[3]

Views

Wise has said he believes, according to a literal reading of the Bible, "that the earth is young, and the universe is young, I would suggest that it’s less than ten thousand years in age." He believes that science can be used to support and demonstrate these claims.[4] Despite believing that science supports his position, Wise has written that "if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate."[5] When asked if scientific conclusions should be constrained by the Bible, Wise answered that "science has never been closed to people who had ideas they wouldn't change. Every scientist has a set of presuppositions and assumptions that he never questions."[6]

As a young child interested in science, Wise tentatively adopted an old Earth creationist point of view after doing a science fair project on the geologic column, but was not completely satisfied with that decision.

What nagged me was that even if the days were long periods of time, the order was still out of whack. After all, science said the sun came before the earth—or at least at the same time—and the Bible said that the earth came three days before the sun. Whereas science said that the sea creatures came before plants and the land creatures came before flying creatures, the Bible indicated that plants preceded sea creatures and flying creatures preceded land creatures. On the other hand, making the days millions of years long seemed to take away most of the conflict. I thus determined to shelve these problems in the back recesses of my mind.[7]

Later, as a sophomore in high school, he took a newly-purchased Bible and a pair of scissors and cut out every verse which could not be interpreted literally if scientific determinations on the age of the earth and evolution were true. He pursued this task with a flashlight under the covers of his bed for several months; at the end, he had removed so much material that "with the cover of the Bible taken off, I attempted to physically lift the Bible from the bed between two fingers. Yet, try as I might, and even with the benefit of intact margins throughout the pages of Scripture, I found it impossible to pick up the Bible without it being rent in two.[7] Wise decided to reject evolution instead of Biblical literalism, deciding

that the rejection of evolution does not necessarily involve the rejection of all of science. In fact, I have come to learn that science owes its very existence and rationale to the claims of Scripture. On the other hand, I have also learned that evolution is not the only claim of modern science which must be rejected if Scripture is assumed to be true.[7]


In a 2006 article for Answers in Genesis, Wise expressed concern for the status of the young Earth belief at Christian colleges and universities where "a survey of Wheaton College students which indicated that while 47% of incoming students believed in a young Earth, only 27% did so at the time the survey was taken.[8] Wise has said that "we need to train Southern Baptist pastors to equip young people to engage Darwinism from elementary school on. We also need to train Southern Baptists to recognize Darwinist thinking in ways that are subtle that they don't even recognize."

Controversy and criticism

Wise has been called the "most honest" creationist by Richard Dawkins, as opposed to others who purposely deceive their audiences.[5] But he criticizes Wise for his predetermined conclusions and ability to continue believing in creationism "if all the evidence in the universe turns against [it]." Dawkins wrote that "this leaves me, as a scientist, speechless. I cannot imagine what it must be like to have a mind capable of such doublethink." This is because "we have it on the authority of a man who may well be creationism’s most highly qualified and most intelligent scientist that no evidence, no matter how overwhelming, no matter how all-embracing, no matter how devastatingly convincing, can ever make any difference."[5]

Wise's arguments about geology have been criticized.[9]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Wise

@huxley,

It's a good day out here, and I hope it's even better out there for you.

I have a few comments to make, not on your person, but rather simply on the article itself.

(a)

"science has never been closed to people who had ideas they wouldn't change. Every scientist has a set of presuppositions and assumptions that he never questions."

Excellent distinction - I think a lot of current thinkers are beginning to see this distinction between "science" and "scientists". The discipline itself is not closed to people - and it is constantly being refined as new theories replace existing ones.

However, it is also partly true (not absolutely true) that "every scientist" never questions his set of cherished presuppositions and assumptions. [I'd rather not call names at the moment as I'm more concerned with the article]. Quite to the contrary, most scientists (at least in the present time) both question their own assumptions and others held by their colleagues.

(b)

Wise has been called the "most honest" creationist by Richard Dawkins, as opposed to others who purposely deceive their audiences.[5] But he criticizes Wise for his predetermined conclusions and ability to continue believing in creationism "if all the evidence in the universe turns against [it]."

This is ironic. Richard Dawkins himself is not so honest as not to "purposely deceive" his audience - at least, it is on record that he has attempted this in the past. I do not see his moral jurisdiction in "criticizing" someone else if he holds his own biases with animosity against those who either question them or disagree with him.

syrup:


This is ironic. Richard Dawkins himself is not so honest as not to "purposely deceive" his audience - at least, it is on record that he has attempted this in the past. I do not see his moral jurisdiction in "criticizing" someone else if he holds his own biases with animosity against those who either question them or disagree with him.

This is interesting. I've always felt Dawkins was dishonest. Creepily so in fact. I just don't see how an Oxford professor could write a book and leave out well known arguments that are not in his favour. He cherry picks and chooses the weakest arguments that he can rail against and then goes at it incessantly. When reading his books I feel that there is no way that his failure to address certain arguments are because he is unaware of the argument. After all he is a top intellectual lecturing at Oxford university.

Have you got a link or a reference of when Dawkin's tried to deceive his audience. I'd like to look at it closer.

I like Kurt Wise - at least better than other YECs. IIRC, he is the only YEC that has admitted that it's his interpretation of the Bible that is keeping him a YEC, as opposed to falsifiable evidence. The others rail on about evidence while putting up disclaimers that strengthen their Morton's demons.