• Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I suppose, but the point is they do a job that requires them be knowledgeable of the science, and yet can compartmentalize things to do that but also have beliefs that run very much against what they observe in reality. Hell, geology was a science born from creationists trying to find evidence of the Flood, who then chose to go the path that the data took them, not the Bible.

      • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        geology was a science born from creationists trying to find evidence of the Flood

        Is this a real thing (outside of the US)?

          • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            It seems that the en article has a bit of an agenda in that regard. You might want to check other versions.

            Maybe reality is a bit more nuanced.

            • Rhaedas@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              An agenda? Interesting. I’d love to hear what agenda you see when it’s simply discussing how Christians over a few centuries starting looking for the remnants of the Flood to prove the Bible but found the opposite, and some followed reality, while others dug deeper into their book and ignored what they had found.