A Conversation with Marcus Ross
As has been mentioned repeatedly about Marcus Ross on other blogs, I thought it would be an interesting mind-experiment to have an imaginary chat with "Dr" Ross.
BigHeathenMike(BHM) - Hi Mr Ross.
Marcus Ross(MR) - It's actually "Dr" Ross.
BHM - Really? Because it seems that you don't agree with the stuff you learned in university.
MR - Well I wouldn't say that.
BHM - How could you not say that? You think the Earth is not more than 10,000 years old, right?
MR - That's correct.
BHM - But your doctoral presentation, or whatever it's called (I'm not a scientist at all), was on fossils that are known to be 65 million years old.
MR - That's correct.
BHM - Sooooo...how does your head compute those conflicting dates?
MR - There's no conflict.
BHM - Haddaya figger?
MR - That there is an intelligence that designed everything on Earth and in the Universe is the best explanation according to the observation and the available science.
BHM - And you're ok with the mass majority of other scientists and, specifically, geologists who are going to think you drank some bad Drain-o to end up at the idea that 10,000 is the maximum age of the fossils?
MR - Yes, I am.
BHM - So about those 65 million year-old fossils...you think some other process was involved that made them appear to be WAY older, or they were just put there by an "intelligence" to fit the data?
MR - Something like that, yes. It's a lot to explain.
BHM - Right, it would take a long time and because you are studied in this subject, like many other scientists and geologists, you could take the time to teach me, were I in a university or something where you were an instructor.
MR - I am working as a professor at Liberty University right now.
BHM - Right. But how is it that you are not misrepresenting yourself, either now or when you did your doctoral thesis thingy?
MR - I never misrepresented myself!
BHM - Well, either you believe that the Earth is less than 65 million years old, as you say, in which case you were dishonest in saying it is that old (and, by implication, much older) in your thesis thingy, OR you do believe that the Earth and its fossils are very old and you are being dishonest currently in your job teaching Young Earth Creationism. Which is it?
MR - The science shows that...
BHM - I'm not talking about science now, I'm talking about you, personally. In which instance are or were you dishonest?
MR - Look, I have students I have to get back to.
BHM - Yes, and it seems that you, much like a "doctor" who advises homeopathy to fix someone's ailments, are misusing your position of influence over people who don't know any better. Just because one is medicine and the other is Earth science doesn't mean it is any less damaging in the long run.
MR - I'm not misusing anything. This is what the science shows. As it says in my DVD presentation with my partner, Stephen Meyer:
Meyer and Ross argue why design is a better scientific explanation for the Cambrian explosion. They argue that this is not an argument from ignorance, but rather the best explanation of the evidence from our knowledge base of the world.
BHM - That's exactly my point. You actually believe that the science shows that design is the way things work and you actually believe that the science shows that the Earth is around 10,000 years old - which means that you were completely dishonest in your doctoral thesis thingy and therefore only did it to get your doctorate which you are now using as an authority document to ensure your students listen to you and learn crap that is entirely contrary to what you presented as if it were what you believed in your thesis thingy.
MR - I have students to teach.
BHM - I believe the word is "mislead", you dishonest assface. Integrity should count for something.