Showing posts with label Austin Cline. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Austin Cline. Show all posts

Saturday, 14 May 2011

Atheist Blogger: Hugh Ross is a Young Earth Creationist



In a book co-written with Dr. Fazale Rana, Hugh Ross argues for an old earth.




Joel Kontinen

At times, one might encounter interesting claims in blogs. Recently, Austin Cline of About.com had this to say about Dr. Hugh Ross:

Mel Andrews appears to be a creationist -- and a Young Earth Creationist too, since he cites Hugh Ross as an authority. He certainly denies any sort of theistic evolution.”

Interesting claim. At first glance, it would seem that astrophysicist Huge Ross has repented of his old-Earth views. However, his organisation Reasons to Believe still teaches that biblical genealogies contain gaps and that Earth is 4.6 billion years old, so About.com’s claim is a bit off the mark.

Mr. Cline has previously for instance claimed that Darwinian evolution is "as well attested in science as gravity or plate tectonics" and dismissed the historical reality of Jesus' miracles.

I hadn’t heard of Mel Andrews before but he seems to be a Christian artist living in California. Cline quoted his Twitter feed. Mr. Andrews was discussing whether miraculous healings (like I have done here and here) are possible.

Austin Cline denies everything that has to do with the supernatural so he has to believe that the universe made itself from nothing and that miracles cannot possibly happen.

But judging from his views of Hugh Ross’ apologetics, I would still be a bit sceptical of this kind of denialism.

Source:

Cline, Austin. 2011. Mel Andrews: God Does Heal Amputees! About.com.

Sunday, 26 July 2009

The “Fact” of Evolution: When Is a Fact Not a Fact?



Could “a change in allele frequency in a population over time” have changed the cousin of this fellow into a blogger writing on the wonders of evolution?



Joel Kontinen

It seems that this blog has recently caused a considerable amount of displeasure to some readers, especially to Austin Cline of About. com, whose name I happened to mention in an earlier post.

You might guess that this displeasure stems from my reluctance to admit that Darwinian evolution is a universally acknowledged fact. Austin Cline quickly posted a reply on About.com in which he repeated his earlier thesis that belief in evolution is not dogmatic.

Cline says:

The statement "evolution is a fact" is no more a dogma than "gravity is a fact" or "plate tectonics is a fact" are dogmas. Saying that evolution or gravity is a fact is simply a recognition of reality.

Actually, creationist scientists played major roles in the discovery of both gravity and plate tectonics. Few Bible-believing scientists would doubt them. The problem is with the ideology beginning with the e-word.

Cline’s chief witness is no other than the late Stephen J. Gould, who wrote an article for Discoverer magazine in 1981 entitled Evolution as Fact and Theory.

Like Humpty Dumpty, evolutionists want to set the rules of the semantic game: “When I say a word it means exactly what I want it to mean.” For Cline, evolution is “the change in allele frequency in a population over time”.

Now, this was not the definition I was referring to, as he could easily have found out by reading some of the earlier posts I have written on this blog. No creationist that I know of doubts that animals have changed over time and do change.

What they do doubt, however, is the “goo-to-you-via-the-zoo” version in which we are all the descendants of a primeval unicellular being. That, if anything, is very dogmatic since there is no real evidence for it but it is assumed a priori.

Otherwise, they would have a Divine foot at the door. And that is something that would definitely spoil their day.

But let us return to where we began, i.e. Austin Cline’s statement on evolution being as well attested in science as gravity or plate tectonics. In his excellent book The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions (2008), Dr. David Berlinski says:

Although Darwin’s theory is very often compared favorably to the great theories of mathematical physics on the grounds that evolution is as well established as gravity, very few physicists have been heard observing that gravity is as well established as evolution. They know better and they are not stupid. (p. 191)

Sources:

Berlinski, David. 2008. The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions. New York: Crown Forum.

Cline, Austin. 2009: Joel Kontinen: Acknowledging Reality is Being Dogmatic. About.com. (21 July).
http://atheism.about.com/b/2009/07/21/joel-kontinen-acknowledging-reality-is-being-dogmatic.htm

Tuesday, 7 July 2009

“Evolution is both theory and fact”?



The "fact of human evolution" according to T. H. Huxley. Image courtesy of Wikipedia.




Joel Kontinen


Richard Dawkins said that evolution made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. No wonder, then, that many latter day atheists are aghast at any criticism of Darwinian evolution.

For instance Austin Cline of About.com recently showed his displeasure at people who would dare doubt Darwinism. He claimed that evolution “is both theory and fact”. In the same context he said, “Everything in science is supposed to proceed by tentative theories rather than dogmatic pronouncements.”

Obviously, seen from an atheistic perspective, “evolution is fact” is not a dogmatic pronouncement. Yet many Darwinists have a prior commitment to a certain dogma. Richard Lewinton confessed that scientists often choose to make up “unsubstantiated just-so stories ” because they “have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism… Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

In other words, if a tentative theory points to a designer, it is excluded – on philosophical grounds. It is no wonder Dr. Henry Morris called his last book Some Call It Science.

The problem with Darwinian evolution is that it only allows naturalistic explanations. It is not a search for truth or even for knowledge.


Sources:

Cline, Austin. 2009. Evolution and the Law: Textbook Disclaimers. About. com: atheism. (23 June).
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/evo/blevo_law_disclaimers.htm?nl=1

Lewinton, Richard. 1997. Billions and billions of demons. The New York Review of Books, p. 31, (9 January 1997).

Morris, Henry M. 2006. Some Call It Science. The Religion of Evolution. El Cayon, CA: Institute for Creation Research.