An MD/engineer/theologian/creationist on local turf!

I guess it depends on what he means by "earth". If he means the third planet from Sol he probably won't need to know much biology. His talk will undoubtedly focus on the coalescence of a solar nebular, the cooling of the crust, outgassing and primordial atmospheres. It will be, I am certain, completely awesome.

See, I'm a wild optimist who firmly believes an educated person would be talking about reasonable things when asked to give a professional opinion, and when asked to flail wildly outside his expertise in support of utter superstition will refuse to attach his credentials to such. I am also in the market for a bridge...

He's on an upper midwest tour. He was in Rapid City last weekend.

Blogwhoring:

Another Doctor Shows His Egnorance

He's on an upper midwest tour. He was in Rapid City last weekend.

Blogwhoring:

Another Doctor Shows His Egnorance

Oh, please, please, take a video camera with you. And a good microphone and tripod... You can just leave it recording. I'll tell you, the trick to get good sound is to put the mic close to the speaker (duh! I know, but many people don't bother because they can hear OK), and it also helps a lot to have a camera that has manual audio gain, instead of auto.

There, now you can record your own creationist nailing, the same as Dawkins, Ken Miller, Peter Atkins, etc. (Has Sam Harris done one?)

To answer the question- Guliuzza knows for certain how the world began- it's all written down in a 2000 year old book! (Sorry to spoil the surprise.)

http://www.kotatv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6308732

"As a creationist and i'm a creationist, I begin with the bias that the bible is true and the bible is true history," Dr. Guliuzza said. "I use that as the basis for which I interpret other things around the world."

Sorry about the double-post. I waited for five minutes for the comment to transmit, thought I had stopped it and re-sent it. Probably a penalty for blog-whoring.

A scientist might start out with the belief that the Bible is true, but he has to explore the possibility that it isn't.

This man hasn't done that, and won't do that, because he's been taught that faith is a good thing. He's a fraud and a deluded fool, and the worst part is that he's done most of the deluding.

A scientist might start out with the belief that the Bible is true, but he has to explore the possibility that it isn't.

I'm sure the good doctor doesn't think that's really necessary because, you see, God told him the Bible is true. God wouldn't lie about a thing like that now, would he? Ah, the joys of circular reasoning!

Sweet Chocolate Jesus! He's got the bloody trifecta of impressive but irrelevant credentials.

If not for the pesky fact that he's YEC (apparently), I'm sure he'd have unseated Dr. Egnore as the DI's favoured mouthpiece.

"Our body has all the hallmarks of a system that somebody designed."

I suppose what someone really ought to do is pin him down as to exactly what those hallmarks are.

In fact, the body is so well-designed that medical doctors can spout off about religion instead of healing people...

I've never understood why doctors in general are considered to be exceptionally intelligent people. If you're looking for people who are highly motivated, extremely hard-working and great at memorization, then yes, you've picked the right group of people. However, med school (at least in Canada, I can't speak for the US or anywhere else) does very little to promote critical or analytical thinking skills.

That's not to say there aren't some great thinkers amongst the medical profession - there are, but I wouldn't say this is the norm. A medical degree (and once again, I'm speaking in terms of Canadian medical schools) certainly is no certification of ability to think.

Sad. :)

"I use that as the basis for which I interpret other things around the world."

The funny thing about creationists is that they admit that they start with the belief that the Bible is true and interpret the world in accordance with it. But, then they want to turn around and say that the world confirms the truth of the Bible - i.e. young earth creationism. In other words, "I interpret the facts in accordance with the Bible, throw out anything that doesn't agree with it as 'junk science', and (shockingly) all my (reinterpreted) facts support my Biblical worldview - an amazing confirmation of the truth of the Bible!"

Yes, by all means, document the fellow's existence. I need documentation. I'm a little gunshy following the hijinks over at PT, the prank-within-a-prank involving He Who Should Be Egnored. Crankily...SH

He's a creationist. Cleric/Thief multiclass. The rest is unnecessary.

Sorry about the double-post. I waited for five minutes for the comment to transmit, thought I had stopped it and re-sent it. Probably a penalty for blog-whoring.

I think what happens there is the comment transmits properly, but the updated page fails to load on your end. What you should do is hit Stop, highlight the text of your comment, hit ctrl+c (or whatever the Mac copy command is), and then hit "reload" and scroll to the bottom of the page. If your comment isn't there at the bottom, try again.

While it is always funny to read accounts of another creationist getting a slapdown I wonder what is the ultimate objective for scientists here and what is the best means of achieving it. Using empirical reasoning has been tried for almost 150 years yet it doesn't seem to work as a means of persuading the general public when set against a religious argument. I suggest that a two pronged approach should be adopted. If a scientist is going to take on a creationist in a public debate situation then he or she should work in parallel with someone espousing an alternative 'faith based' approach to the evidence - for instance a Pastafarian. It is only through treating ridiculous ideas with the respect they deserve (!) that we may have a chance at proving to people that the scientific method is the best way we humans have devised to arrive at hypothesis about our world that fit in with the evidence. Fundamental Christian creationism is not the alternative to evolution, it is the alternative to Spagetti Monsterism.

I suggest that a two pronged approach should be adopted.

In other words, invite Egnor AND Guliuzza and debate them both?

(Couldn't resist).

Bleh. I'm going to have to make a point of vocalizing my support of evolution once I'm an engineer; the perfidious mockery of the profession by the IDiots infesting it shames me by association. :( I wonder if the world's ready for an engineer who not only is not pig-ignorant about biology but is willing to admit where their knowledge ends...

He holds a B.S. in engineering from South Dakota School of Mines and a B.A. in theology from Moody Bible Institute.

Ah, an ID quote expert.

That and a moody bible outlook will take him everywhere. [Sorry, couldn't resist.]

A degree from a school of mines? The guy has a creationist MLS degree!

Wouldn't you like to hear one creationist say:

"I began my investigation using the bias that The Bible is true....

Unfortunately, the evidence I found completely contradicted my initial hypotheses about the world."

I suppose it does happen from time to time.

So are these Christians in Action people inviting, you know, geologists and astronomers as well? People who might actually have some insight into how the earth began?

nd thght Mrrs ws bckwtr!

Hck, mkng fn f Rdgwtr mks PZ lk lk n SSCT Prfssr t dstngshd nvrsty!

could be worse. Could be a marine biologist helping to explain how dragons might exist (yes, real fire breathing, virgin devouring flying reptiles)

In fairness to the dragon man - he does say that he believes that they never existed and that he's just using biological principles to imagine what their biology would be if they did exist. Which they don't. :)

Re #21:

Wouldn't you like to hear one creationist say:

"I began my investigation using the bias that The Bible is true....

Unfortunately, the evidence I found completely contradicted my initial hypotheses about the world."

I suppose it does happen from time to time.

Yes, it does. In fact, that's largely how I came to realize that the "faith" practiced by my older relatives was just a quaint and pitiable myth. That and the other religious contradictions (god is love/shoot to kill; forgive all sins/stone or at least ostracize the queers) led me to realization that my own worldview is atheistic.

One things they DID have right though... "the truth shall set you free". :-)

Well, Christian Burnham, there's always Glenn Morton 9though he's not an atheist).

I also seem to recall that Michael Shermer spent some of his foolish, ill-spent youth on the Bible-believin' side of the fence.

Well, Christian Burnham, there's always Glenn Morton (though he's not an atheist).

I also seem to recall that Michael Shermer spent some of his youth on the Bible-believin' side of the fence.

Oops.

Is he a surgeon? I don't know if I could stand it if I came across another creationist surgeon.

WTF is up with Harvards school of Public Health? I just dealt with an HIV Conspiracy Theorist with an MPH from there.

Awww Orac!

Dont Google him. Ignorance is bliss.

*HUG!*

there's always Glenn Morton 9though he's not an atheist).

He is still a pretty confused fella in alot of ways.

Wanna know something? I'm a bad doctor. I'm not boasting. I mean, who would? Just stating a fact that I've never really gotten the hang of the whole healing-the-sick thing. And don't interpret this as some sort of false modesty. No, I'm homogeneously unqualified to practice medicine in any capacity. I *really* don't have a clue. And no one could be more shocked than me that I've been allowed to rise to a position of such importance and responsibility.

I guess it all started in high school where I was a very bad science student. One day when we were supposed to be dissecting a frog, I accidentally disassembled my desk. Oh, but, you know, I was a popular kid. You know, the other students were always eager to help me out. So you know, during a test whenever I'd get that *confused* look on my face - which was invariably - well, the cheat notes would just start flying! Even the teachers would start whispering answers, you know, *ahem* mitochondria... But I didn't worry about it. I figured, how far could you coast on charm? Well, pretty far, actually!

They just offered me the job of Chief of Surgery. Apparently, I've logged more hours in surgery than any other man my age. Four thousand hours this year alone. What no one seems to have noticed that it was all with the same patient.

- Props to The Kids In The Hall

Dont Google him. Ignorance is bliss.

Actually, he is a flight surgeon, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's a fully trained surgeon. In the Air Force, some flight surgeons are E.R. docs and others are other specialties with some surgical training.

I can hope, can't I?

I wonder though: Is this him?

I suppose what someone really ought to do is pin him down as to exactly what those hallmarks are.

The Ford Pinto has features which make it highly dangerous in certain types of collision. It is the result of Design.
The Creationist Brain also has features which make it highly dangerous in certain types of collision. Therefor, it too, must be the result of Design ...

Oh... I thought you said he was a sturgeon.
I wonder if he ever noticed all the fossils at the SD School of Mines? Was he at all curious? I did "summer camp" (field geology) at SDSM&T a few decades ago, but I never saw any Creationists there--just lots of fossils.

""As a creationist and i'm a creationist, I begin with the bias that the bible is true and the bible is true history," Dr. Guliuzza said. "I use that as the basis for which I interpret other things around the world. Also, I like to stick my finger in my buttcrack and smell it because as a stinkyfingerist I begin with the bias that smelling my stinky finger wards off cancers and demons."

Anyone up for field trip to Hutchinson next week, to spot the wild creationist making his public display?

You know, I would if it wasn't so far away. Bah, someone needs to tell me how to find the crazies seminars in Kansas. I *know* there must be some here.

As to Erv's question about the Harvard School of Public Health, that's a trade school oriented toward training (not educating) potential administrators, just like a business school, like the Harvard Business School (alma mater of Dubya), is a trade school. Neither place emphasizes data analysis in the scientific sense or science, for that matter. Students are expected to learn how to think before matriculating. But then you cannot trust a person's credentials to tell you if they think clearly. Kurt Wise, who's a science advisor to Ken Ham's new museum and who also succeeded Billl Dembski as head of the Center for Theology and Science at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, earned a Harvard PhD in paleontology under Steve Gould no less. And don't forget that Phillip Johnson, midwife if not father, to modern ID, is a graduate of Harvard College, as is Bruce Chapman, founder and director of the DI (Chapman's college roommate was George Gilder who's also been known to write some real dreck on ID and evolution). And I say this as a Harvard College alum.

On a slightly different vein, I think Guliuzza's degree from the Moody Bible Institute is incorrect. I'm sure what he majored in merited BS, not a BA, since the former is the only thing Moody dispenses IMHO.

mark: Shame he's not. At least if he were a large fish he could feed a family for a day or two.

He holds a B.S. in engineering from South Dakota School of Mines and a B.A. in theology from Moody Bible Institute.

Ah, an ID quote expert.

That and a moody bible outlook will take him everywhere. [Sorry, couldn't resist.]