Texas Citizens Stand Up For Paluxysaurus
Dinosaurs and humans are shown living together in the Creation Museum in Kentucky. From Flickr user yumiec00kies.
Earlier this year Texas updated the name of its official state dinosaur, a sauropod dinosaur previously called Pleurocoelus but recently renamed Paluxysaurus. To celebrate the name change, a team of scientists is creating a full restoration of the dinosaur’s skeleton for the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History, but not everyone was happy about the announcement of this plan in the Star-Telegram newspaper.
In a letter to the editor, Richard Hollerman of Richland Hills, Texas, took offense that the newspaper did not pay heed to his personal beliefs, namely that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time less than 10,000 years ago. There is no evidence to support this claim, but Mr. Hollerman chastised the paper for “blindly accepting unfounded assertions by unbelieving paleontologists.”
This triggered an overwhelming response from Hollerman’s neighbors in the state. The paper printed at least seven replies that picked apart Hollerman’s anti-science tirade. Said Mark Stevens from Forth Worth:
According to creationists, science is correct about the following:
Chemistry, computer science, mathematics, engineering, sociology, systems science, psychology, medicine, nuclear science, agronomy, astronomy, nanotechnology, acoustics, biophysics, condensed matter physics, electronics, fluid dynamics, geophysics, plasma physics, vehicle dynamics, solar astronomy, meteorology, limnology, soil science, toxicology, marine biology, parasitology, anatomy, biochemistry, structural biology, entomology, cetology, phylogeny, algebra, calculus, cartography, geopolitics, criminology, agriculture, language engineering, pathology, pediatrics, nutrition, physical therapy and dermatology.
But for some reason, according to creationists, science is wrong about evolution. How is that even possible?
Another commenter, Charlie Rodriguez from the city of Arlington, replied that Hollerman’s assertions would be a joke if not for the many others who believe the Bible should be read as a science book. There has been a proliferation of “creation museums” over the past several years, and “evolution” is still a dirty word in some places in the country. Even so, it was heartening to see so many people stand up for paleontology, evolution, and good science.
[Hat-tip to Millard Fillmore's Bathtub for bringing this story to our attention.]
Digg
Reddit
Stumbleupon
[...] it might be easy to think of young earth creationism or other strains of anti-science as mostly American phenomena there has recently been a resurgence in Islamic creationism. In some Islamic countries there is [...]
Pingback by Dinosaurs Get Ready to Go to Abu Dhabi | Dinosaur Tracking — November 9, 2009 @ 9:27 am
As the writer of the original letter to the editor of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, let me speak for myself. First, it is true that science is correct in those areas where facts have been established. We writers who believe in God and in His record of creation in the Bible, surely believe this and to charge us with not believing in science is biased, deceptive, and wrong. Second, some scientific matters have been infiltrated with atheistic and unscientific additions. Astronomy is accurate when it informs us that there are a certain number of planets and that the closest star is so many miles away. It is wrong and unscientific when it presumes to speak about the past and claims that the “Big Bank” is a fact and scientific. Third, not all scientists believe in evolution. Thousands so accept the Biblical account of creation in contrast to evolution. Fourth, dinosaur research is a matter of history rather than science. We don’t have dinosaurs today; all we have are fossils, with no transitional forms. Both unbelieving, atheistic scientists and Christian scientists look at the evidence and arrive at different conclusions. Please don’t go beyong the evidence! And please accurately reflect believing scientists; do not make unfounded charges. Richard Hollerman
Comment by Richard Hollerman — November 12, 2009 @ 6:34 pm