Also, the conversation veered off the road on my Malay post, going into the space-time continuum.  So, since I like to compartmentalize things, I thought I’d open up a new post where space-time continuum, advanced civilizations, etc can be talked about.  So, this is basically a science post where you can post anything to do with science vs religion.  I don’t care about threadjacking here, as long as it shows some reference to science.  I do want to pull a quote from Nachminides, as we start this discussion.  I posted this previously on my DNA post:

“Although writing more than 700 years ago, [Rabbi Moses] Nachmanides’ message is even more clear and relevant today.  His writings directed the person of faith to realize that there is much more hidden than revealed, both in the traditional Biblical writings and also in the natural world.  Our challenge is to continually study and investigate both realms, with the realization that apparent conflicts are merely artifacts of temporary incomplete understanding in one or both realms.  This avoidance of intellectual pride, allows the person of traditional religious faith to work comfortably within the framework of rigorous scientific hypothesis and empiricism.  This is also in keeping with the rationalist approach in Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed.”

So, Bishop Rick, before you get started on Evolution/Creation, please read this blog post from S Faux, Biblical Genesis Corresponds with Evolution. I’m no expert, but Faux is an LDS professor at a university in the midwest.  I think he presents a pretty compelling argument, especially for those like you who view the creation story as non-literal.

For those wanting to discuss space-time continuum, feel free to continue the discussion here.  (I want to quote Doc Brown from Back to the Future, “1.21 jigga-watts!!!  He mispronounces it badly, it should be giga-watts.)  Perhaps we need a flux capacitor to truly understand all the implications of the Theory of Relativity.  Star Trek handles time travel pretty well too, and can go back or forward in time relatively easily.  Of course, don’t forget Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure!  Someone mentioned that people don’t go into the future, but I think that is because we have no idea what needs fixing in the future.  It’s much easier to look on the past and fix that instead.

Anyway, I think science and religion ARE compatible, but sometimes it is hard to see how.

So is it possible to be a faithful scientist?  What happens when it seems threatening to your church?

I thought I’d post the more egregious errors here, instead of going section by section as I had originally intended to do.  I just checked the site, and got a chuckle out of this little exchange:

On May 29th, 2008 reds0xfan (not verified) says:

I’ve searched all over your website, and can’t understand your rationale for why the lands are 75 x 120 miles wide. Please provide a reference as to how you came to this conclusion. Saying “Please read the site, it is very clear.” is not helpful. Please be more specific as to what page(s) you are referring to.

On May 29th, 2008 admin says:

Measure Erie, PA to Rochester, NY.

You call that justification?  In the “Errors” section, you said people should figure the internal map first, and then you did just the opposite.  Puhleeez.

Here are some unanswered questions of the theory, along with some other points.

1. Is seismic activity normal for NY?  A catastrophic earthquake from 2000 years ago would provide great evidence for your theory.  Does the evidence exist?
2. The website never addresses the issues of cement.  The author says that the only extravagant building mentioned is Noah’s palace, but Nephi says his temple was after the manner of Solomon’s temple.  Shouldn’t a cement building last longer than wood?
3. Lake Tonawanda is from wrong time period.  10,000 BC is not same as 600 BC.
4. The author calls Genessee River Gorge a “sea.”  Seems more like a river….
5. Where are bones from last battles?  Mass graves?  Weapons?
6. Why did Moroni bury plates in a war zone (Cumorah)?  Wouldn’t it have been easier/safer to bury them away from the fighting?
7. The author attacks Evolution, when he means to attack Carbon Dating.  Evolutionists didn’t create carbon dating, chemists did.  He is attacking the wrong scientists when he says mammoth is from 600 BC not 10,000 BC.  Whether he chooses to attack evolutionists, or carbon daters, he’s not just fighting uphill, he’s fighting up a cliff.
8. Does Geology say Niagara Falls rose/fell 2000 years ago?  I don’t think so.
9. Archaeological Evidence Section should be renamed “Archeological Speculation”.  There is absolutely no evidence in this section.  Perhaps it is plausible, but a prosecutor would be fired if he referred to these things as evidence.
10. “pre-historic stone age savage” does not describe the more civilized Nephites/Lamanites who fought with iron.
11. Seneca and Iroquois do not date to BoM times.  I know you did not mean to imply this, but it is easy for the reader to make this leap.
12. Where is the evidence for barley, wheat, other grains?
13. Why is there no mention of DNA evidence?

I’m happy to discuss these problems, but it seems like the crickets are chirping too loud for me to hear any rebuttals…

So how do people reconcile evolution with creationism? What do you think about “intelligent design”?