Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
A Question for creation scientists and believers in the young earth version of creation?
What technological developments have resulted from Creation science, how has it improved our lives in the way main stream science has and how many mining companys search for oil and minerals using the young earth geological model as opposed to main stream Geological science and how successful have they been? Main stream geology states the world is 4.5 billion years old and underpins hundreds of billions of dollars worth of mining world wide each year. Why dont the big mining companys use creationist geologist to find the oil and metals that drive the world economy?
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
Actually old earth naturalism is no where used in technology, medicine or agriculture for any practical positive benefit... some negative effects would include racism and social Darwinism. It is not the compellign data, but the humanist philosophy that drives it which rules out God acting in history before ever looking at the data.... not a very unbiased .. kinda like stacking the jury and then holding the trial after its a foregone conclusion
Mining peole do consult with creationists, such as with Austin a creationist with theories of coal formation, and people who simulate plate movements use Baumgartener's software for simulations of plate movements with different initial conditions.
Nasa has had some surprises since the anticipates small magnetic fields around the gas giants due to their expected old ages,,, yet the magnetic fields are giant and the planets give off more heat than they take in as predicted by Humphreys a creation scientist. Nautical people have always and continue to build ships of similar size ratios to Noah's ark for destroyers, tankers, etc... they do not use the cubical size of the ark of Gilgamesh as that would roll over the ocean like a volleyball (sorry borg)Source(s): see Austin on Mount Saint Helens see Baumgartener on Plate Tectonics see Oard on the Ice Age see Humphreys on the RATE project, Radioisotopes and the age of the earth and Starlight and TIme see Medical professor of the year Menton with interesting DVDs on Eyes, Ears, fur and feathers, birth see Dewitt on DNA, cavemen and chemestry see Werner Gitt on information science see Henry Morris on flood geology The Genesis Flood see Sarfati on tips for how to won chess blindfolded playing against 12 people at once and on almost anythign in The Answers Book, Refusting Evolution, War of the Worldviews and other interesting books http://www.answersingenesis.org/
- The DoctorLv 71 decade ago
Creation science has provided nothing to our society, not even any evidence supporting it except attacking unresolved questions in geology, evolution, etc.
In regards to a answer above that only 55% of scientists support evolution, I saw a recent survey that said that the United States was only second (behind Turkey, of all things) in the percentage of people who believe in creation science:
"How does the U.S. compare with other countries in terms of belief in evolution? Not so hot. A study of attitudes in 34 countries published in Science in 2006 shows that the United States ranks last in popular acceptance of evolution except for Turkey. Almost 40 percent of Americans in this study flatly rejected evolution, whereas the comparable numbers in European countries and Japan ranged from 7 to 15 percent. That may partly reflect U.S. high school kids' dismal math and science scores relative to other developed countries, which to my mind underscores a home truth: the more you know, the less you take on faith." --Cecil Adams in the "Straight Dope" column.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Well if they used the creation scientists model of the world to plan anything I think it's safe to say that it would be a dismal failure. These are people after all who believe an American Bison took a several thousand mile journey across an ocean in order to be saved from a flood by a guy in the middle of a desert,if we are to believe the Bible that is.
- DesperadoLv 51 decade ago
Creation scientist are dispersed throughout all the fields of science. The last poll I saw about 10 years ago said that about 55% of scientist believed in Darwinian evolution and geologic ages. I think you are assuming that creation scientist are few and all huddled up somewhere. That is not true.
- RBLv 71 decade ago
I was young earth, but now old earth. I don't think geological companies care about the "religious" aspect of a persons belief, just their education.
- timLv 61 decade ago
Because oil companies know how to use geological data and believe in evolution does not mean that evolution is correct. It means the companies know how to use that data to find oil, not how it got there.
- Cogito SumLv 41 decade ago
This version of creationism is absurd.
God is not deceptive. He would not have made the eath look Billions of years old, just because He can.
God is truth. Science pursues the truth. I trust both.
- 1 decade ago
Also to add Germany engineering companies have been using the principals of evolution to develop more aerodynamic trains. how many have ever been on a farm.
It can't be many.
- strothLv 45 years ago
in case you had studied geology (which I quite doubt), you would be attentive to that there are 2 significant branches: actual geology and historic geology. actual geology is the variety they use daily and is per watching, testing, and demonstrating. that's the variety they use to do their mining and such. historic geology is the attempt to appreciate the historic previous of the earth and its foundation. That has no place in useful life.