Hugh Ross

[Sophus]

Is anyone else familiar with him? He seems to be more reasonable than your average Creationist but I still don't understand why he has a problem with evolution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Ross_(creationist)

[Squid]

Hugh Ross is not a dumb guy, really he's not.  However, when it comes to sacrificing scientific integrity for his beliefs....intelligence is thrown out the window.  He, like many creationists, use a distorted strawman of evolution when criticizing the theory and, of course, always brings up cosmological issues when trying to "refute" evolution...it's a bit sad to watch really.

[Sophus]

Have you read his book More Than A Theory Squid? I keep trying to read it but come across these horrible strawmen and othe misleading information. I'm very curious to know what he claims makes his Creationist model "testable" but just can't seem to read a book with so little integrity.

[Sophus]

Oops. Nevermind.... I found this: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/10/hugh_rosss_testable_scientific.php I could've sworn someobdy said he had no problem with common descent though...

Would still love to see you tear Ross to shreds in that book your writing, Squid.  

[Squid]

Oops. Nevermind.... I found this: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/10/hugh_rosss_testable_scientific.php I could've sworn someobdy said he had no problem with common descent though...

Would still love to see you tear Ross to shreds in that book your writing, Squid.  

Oh, a lot of the stuff Ross uses is just rehashed old arguments from others like Henry Morris.  He's tried to dress them up with a sciency sauce to give it a flavor of validity but just like domestic beer it leaves a bitter taste and an empty feeling.  So I'm sure Ross will be covered and mentioned.  Another sad case of when a smart person lets religious beliefs overrule their ability to think analytically.

[NeoHeathen]

I know this thread is rather old but I figured I would state the obvious, but it's quite interesting.

Hugh Norman Ross (born July 24, 1945) is a Canadian-born Old Earth creationist and Christian apologist. An astronomer  and astrophysicist, he has established his own ministry called Reasons To Believe, that promotes forms of Old Earth creationism known as progressive creationism and day-age creationism. Ross accepts the scientific evidence of the age of the earth and the age of the universe, and he rejects evolution  and abiogenesis as explanations for the history and origin of life.[1]

It's interesting how a lot of these creationists who part take in a science field, when observing the evidence, accept it. In this case as an astronomer and astrophysicist, he accepts the age of the universe (and the earth). However he denies evolution and abiogenesis. Isn't it interesting how Creationists cite scientists who reject evolution when they aren't even involved in any relevant field of science?