1. If creationists can’t do science, then why do Kent Hovind and Duane T. Gish, who are creation scientists, have professional degrees in science?
First of all, I would never say “creationists can’t do
science.” What I would say is, creationists
don’t do science, because they start
with a conclusion and reject any evidence that doesn’t fit with it.[i] That’s not how the scientific method works. And if you believe that evolutionists do the same
thing, just read On the Origin of the Species,
compare it to the modern “neo-Darwinian synthesis,” and see how different they
are. If Darwinism were just a religion that
rejects contrary evidence like creationism does, why would the current scientific
consensus be so different from the original “Bible” of that non-existent religion?
Now, to the specific credentials of the two named
creationists. I’ll start with Kent
Hovind, since he’s the one I’m more familiar with. He does not have any degrees in science, that
is simply a false statement. He has a Bachelors
Degree of Religious Education from Midwestern Baptist College[ii], he
then went on to receive his doctorate from Patriot University, a school which
has only religious authorization; it is not accredited by the U.S. Department
of Education[iii] or
recognized by the Council on Higher Education Accreditation.[iv] On a page of Hovind’s old website on which he
was defending his dubious credentials, he claimed that he received a Doctorate
in education from Patriot.[v] That’s already not a “professional degree in
science,” but if you look at his doctoral dissertation, it says right on the front
page that it’s for a “doctor of philosophy in Christian education.”[vi] If you’re calling that a professional degree
in science, I can’t help you.
So how about Duane Gish?
The only thing I really know about that guy is he’s the namesake of the “Gish
Gallop,”[vii]
a cheap debating tactic (which people who are so sure they’re on the right side
of the argument shouldn’t need to use).
But does he have a scientific degree?
Indeed he does; a B.S. in chemistry from UCLA, and a Ph.D. in
Biochemistry from U.C. Berkeley. Those
are decent scientific credentials, so I’ll just return to my original point
that I don’t claim creationists can’t
do science, I claim that they don’t. But don’t take my word for it; Gish himself
said, “We cannot discover by scientific investigation anything about the
creative processes used by the Creator.”[viii] I got news for ya, buddy, if you cannot
discover by scientific investigation anything about a claim you’re making, then
that claim is not scientific (no matter what credentials you have).
[i] “By
definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including
history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.
Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to
interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.”
https://answersingenesis.org/about/faith/
https://answersingenesis.org/about/faith/
[ii] http://www.escambiaclerk.com/MyImages/2005406964.pdf
I’m not posting this affidavit to impugn Hovind’s character (he can do that just fine himself), but because I know how important it is in discussions like this to have sources that are above reproach, I figured what more unimpeachable source could there be than something signed by Hovind’s own hand? Although, I do think it’s strange that he doesn’t even mention Patriot University here.
I’m not posting this affidavit to impugn Hovind’s character (he can do that just fine himself), but because I know how important it is in discussions like this to have sources that are above reproach, I figured what more unimpeachable source could there be than something signed by Hovind’s own hand? Although, I do think it’s strange that he doesn’t even mention Patriot University here.
