1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

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

Steak-umm vs. Neil deGrasse Tyson

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Aaron, Apr 17, 2021.

  1. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    18,545
    Likes Received:
    998
    Faith:
    Baptist
    :Roflmao

    Steak-umm vs. Neil deGrasse Tyson | Evolution News

    Fortunately, this little Twitter feud reminds us that even if the academy is mired in bias, common sense may not be dead yet. And if it takes a frozen meat company to remind us of what our elite overlords have forgotten, so be it. I’m not complaining. Meanwhile, I have a sudden urge to eat a Steak-umm.

     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. RighteousnessTemperance&

    RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,389
    Likes Received:
    1,039
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A most dramatic entrance. "Two thumbs up!" :Thumbsup:Thumbsup Whately has burst onto the stage.

    But is that a pseudonym? It says she is a freelance writer, but gives no links. Looking up the name only led me to a mother and daughter, both long deceased.
     
  3. RighteousnessTemperance&

    RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,389
    Likes Received:
    1,039
    Faith:
    Baptist
    DeGrasse is one of those pompous, condescending, insufferable new atheist "Science" worshipers that imagines he shouldn't have to actually defend what he asserts. Whately's article rightly emphasizes major flaws in the way that "Science" community operates.

    In his article, Tyson points to the peer review system as if it’s a fool-proof barrier against such corruption. But what if the entire discipline has come to rest on a poor epistemological foundation? What if it’s driven by axioms with baked-in blind spots, like methodological naturalism? Peer review cannot solve such systemic issues. On the contrary, it will only perpetuate them. And while Tyson may further claim in the post that the fast track to career stardom is presenting bold, original hypotheses that challenge consensus, many scientists who question an evolutionary narrative of life’s origins would beg to differ. There is a reason why so much of the support for intelligent design remains underground: Because these scientists know that making their hesitations public could, in fact, be a fast track not to career stardom but career suicide.​
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
Loading...