Discussion

Should national monuments be recognising creationism as a viewpoint?

5 replies [Last post]

Should national monuments be recognising creationism as a viewpoint?

Alex Helling's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Posts: 770
Applause: 48

The National Trust has included references to creationism in its new visitors centre at the Giant’s Causeway. The Giant’s Causeway is a world heritage site in Northern Ireland. It is an area of 40,000 interlocking basalt columns, which according to science was the result of a volcanic activity about 60million years ago. However the National Trust seems to imply that this is still open to debate.

After an exhibit showing the historical debates over the formation of the causeway "This debate continues today for some people, who have an understanding of the formation of the earth which is different from that of current mainstream science. Young earth creationists believe that the earth was created some 6,000 years ago. This is based on a specific interpretation of the Bible and in particular the account of creation in the book of Genesis. Some people around the world, and specifically here in Northern Ireland, share this perspective. Young earth creationists continue to debate questions about the age of the earth. As we have seen from the past, and understand today, perhaps the Giant's Causeway will continue to prompt awe and wonder, and arouse debate and challenging questions for as long as visitors come to see it."

The National Trust has confirmed that it as an organization accepts the scientific position and defends its decision its decision by saying “Central to everything is how the Causeway was formed and the National Trust position is that we believe and accept the mainstream scientific idea that the causeway was formed by volcanic eruption 60 million years ago. In the scientific and formation elements we base everything on fact. It's a fact today that there is still a series of debate surrounding the formation of the Causeway but the exhibit is about that debate of how the causeway was formed.”

Should an organisation like the national trust be giving the creationist side of the argument alongside mainstream science?

Debatabase debate: This House believes that evolution has disproved creationism http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/philosophical-political-theory/god/house-believes-evolution-has-disproved-creatio

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/05/national-trust-creationism-giants-causeway

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18728703

45 weeks 1 day ago
Alastair Stevens's picture
Offline
Joined: 21 Mar 2012
Posts: 118
Applause: 11

I dont see why not. Everyone has to admit that we were not there when the causeway was created so we dont know for absolute certainty who is right. I dare say that science has a lot of evidence to back it up but that does not mean it has a monopoly on information.

44 weeks 5 days ago
booji's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 369
Applause: 26

Alastair Stevens wrote:

science has a lot of evidence to back it up...

Evidence is really what matters, people could create thousands of theories for the creation of the causeway but if there is no evidence it just remains a theory. There therefore seems little reason why creationism should be elevated above any other theory that does not have evidence backing it up.

44 weeks 4 days ago
Colin Helling's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Posts: 152
Applause: 8

Of course the national trust has to be open to myths in this particular case, since it was supposedly built by a semi-mythical king in order to invite a definately mythical giant to have fight!

44 weeks 5 days ago
Alex Helling's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Posts: 770
Applause: 48

I spent quite a while on this issue when I was putting it up as I thought the same thing and while it is often mentioned in the news articles that there are lots of legends surrounding the site it is not mentioned how this fits into the displays. It appears that there is a separate section on the myths and legends of the site whereas the creationism disclaimer is in a much more historical/scientific display on how the causeway was created and the debates that were had about it when it was first speculated. I think for evolutionists this would have been ok if not for the fact that "This debate continues today..." rather implies some equivalence in the here and now.

44 weeks 5 days ago
KateDebate's picture
Offline
Joined: 27 Mar 2012
Posts: 146
Applause: 11

Alex Helling wrote:

I think for evolutionists this would have been ok if not for the fact that "This debate continues today..." rather implies some equivalence in the here and now.

I wonder how many people even notice this it is pretty obviously an ending line so they are probably packing up and getting ready to go at this point. The chances are most people will simply interpret it as a prompt to think back over the whole display they have seen.

44 weeks 3 days ago
Syndicate content