To Doug Casey, or the author of the article “How to Directly Benefit From What Will Be the Biggest Change in Human History” (cross-posted to blog www.trutherator.wordpress.com)
I enjoy your writing much, even though I do not have the wherewithal to invest at the scale you do. I do follow in what way I can.
In the article there is the following paragraph:
And it’s not just technology, but science itself that is in jeopardy. If it turns out that anthropogenic global warming is a gigantic hoax (I believe it is), even though it’s said that 97% of scientists believe in it (a lie), and that the science is settled (it’s not), that may discredit the idea of science to the average person. Anything is possible. After all, something like 40% of Americans think the world is about 6,000 years old and cavemen lived with dinosaurs.
You just apparently repeated an oft-repeated and false caricature of people who believe in the Genesis Creation record. Please consider the following points. (FYI, I am “cross-posting” this to my humble blog)
#1 But first, science is ALREADY in great jeopardy for other political reasons having more to do with state-funded and state-promoted ideology than what you call those “40% of Americans”. You believe that the global warming is a hoax, as I do.
#2 That said, I know a great many people who believe the Biblical record and believe it as written, meaning somewhere between 6,000 and 10,000 years for the age of not only Earth but the universe.
I know a great many personally, and please rest assured that the propaganda about such people, the state-sponsored caricature, is itself a hoax. They know full well that hoaxes like AGW are frauds and they know that it is “science FALSELY so-called” (as Paul so aptly put it when talking about some of the superstitions and philosophical rabbit trails) of the ancient Greeks. Some of that science falsely so-called were some of their creation myths involving exotic human-like gods.
#3 Please note that there are a great many more scientists that believe in Genesis Creation than almost anybody can believe, today. My conservative estimate is at least 10s of 1000s but may be much more. It is a tiny fraction compared to Darwinian believers but they are more than are able to declare themselves because “coming out” is a career-killer for them. That’s probably why I no longer find a list of them at the web site www.icr.org, a group that does peer-reviewed research published in non-mainstream science journals, because the research done by them is blacklisted in the elite-approved publications.
Even when the research is on non-related areas, their publications are now blacklisted. Forest Mims, the guy that embarrassed NASA by proving them wrong with $130 worth of equipment in his back yard, writer of “The Amateur Scientist”, was almost guaranteed a column in Scientific American. The editor interviewed him face to face, and reluctantly had to end the interview after asking him whether he believed in Darwinian evolution, to which Mims replied he did not.
#4 Science lost at least 40 years of biology by throwing out research into “vestigial organs”, and a lot of people suffered any measure of harm to their health by the great many appendectomies and other removals of organs important for health. People can live without their left leg, but doctors never removed it if had an inflammation.
THAT is a lot of science lost because scientists chose to laugh at Creation scientists who told them it could not be useless. Creation scientists and even Intelligent Design theorists are ridiculed today just as the first doctor who theorized that there were invisibly small biological entities that carried disease from person to person. Instead of listening to his please to sterilize instruments, they harassed him into an insane asylum.
#5 The anthropic principle, and the 2nd law of thermodynamics, are the “smoking guns” of the first days of Creation, and DNA is the irreducible complex of (1) a completely abstract symbolic (4-digit) digital software programming language, (2) the physical scaffolding for the language, (3) the mRNA that translates it into instructions for ALL the thousands, millions, of reactions, transactions, structures of biology, the (4) biochemical environment necessary for the rest of it.
Without any one of these four things, life would be impossible. Pasteur used the scientific method to prove life comes from life, spontaneous abiogenesis does not happen.
And yet, smart scientists claim that despite the evidence, the Pasteur experiments and the chicken-egg DNA paradox, it happened anyway, in a land (or soup) far far away and a long long time ago. Once upon a time.
#6 Isaac Newton, the greatest scientist that ever lived, wrote more about the Bible than about science. Some have said he would be atheist today, as if that were progress, but the arguments on the subject were the same then as now. He said the very fact of order in the universe was evidence of a designer, and that he wrote about science as a way to help young men come to the knowledge of God.
These are logical arguments, and we all like to think we think logically, but there is emotion in the mix. It took me quite awhile to get shaken free from my own youthful atheism (and communism). It took the philosopher Antony Flew longer, as he said DNA had convinced him that there had to be a Creator God.