Whoever the speaker is, he’s carrying us through the creation of the earth according to current science. He mocks everything, to the glee of the audience — everything is “supposedly” and “mainstream scuence will tell you,” with sarcasm in his voice.
One thing that discredits science, he claims, is that the Hawaiian Islands, “supposedly” formed by volcanic action, but they all have different minerals so could not possibly have a common source. And if the earth was formed from a molten source, then where did the water come from?
He wants to change our paradigm, and pulls out a “pair of dimes” which the audience says is worth 20 cents. No, he says, they are old dimes made of silver and are worth much more than 20 cents — that’s what new information will do for you, he says. (Baloney — that’s a redefinition of terms, a changing of the goal posts.)
Without offering a single sentence of evidence, he claims that the water molecule is the most common throughout the universe — water everywhere, “even on the sun, which is the largest planet in our solar system.”
He talks about “the waters above the firmament and the waters below,” insisting that is literal, and not how the ancient Hebrews conceived the universe.
His entire approach is to quote some fragment of scripture, and tells us that his literal reading of that scripture is true science. NO support for any claims, no matter how odd — that rocks precipitated out of water, and do not come from the cooling of magma.
I won’t try to report any more detail — it’s one silly assertion after another, with no attempt to support his claims. If he had, I would report that. It’s just “they’re finding this, they’re finding that,” with “They” being either anonymous, or some named but otherwise unknown person writing in some unknown source.
The speaker is Dean Sessions. He is now mocking the statement in the Universe, to great laughter from the audience. Peer review is good, he says, but is also used as a gatekeeper to prevent consideration of competing ideas. As to the statement regarding the science taught at BYU, he says that’s all fine and good, the Church doesn’t officially have an opinion, “but God does.”
He misrepresents EVERYTHING. If I weren’t pecking this out on my IPad, I’d capture more, both what he misrepresents and what my understanding is.
Fossils don’t prove the antiquity of the earth — if fossils were real and took long periods to form then there would be far, far more partially fossilized matter at mire recent stages of fossilization. This is a commonality of his claims — he doesn’t offer observations or expkain his version of how things happened; instead, he mocks a scientific claim and tries to destroy it by saying “if this were true, then this other thing MUST have happened, but it didn’t,” as if he understood the creative process so completely that he can say with assurance what MUST have happened.
No, it’s Rod Meldrum, not Dean Sessions. They really ought to introduce themselves.
I’m glad you are there! This sounds like a child explaining the world to his playground mates.
My God have mercy on your soul, Ardis.
“This sounds like a child explaining the world to his playground mates.”
Or an executive branch press conference.
Some of his biggest helpers are in my ward, here in Mesa. Good people, a little crazy, but they set up chairs and stuff. I wish they’d stop treating me like I’m apostate.
Also, I worked in the temple with Dean. I avoided him from the beginning, but lots of leadership thought he was great and encouraged me to talk to him, since we’re “both deep thinkers.” It took me about five minutes to decide to steer clear.
“Without offering a single sentence of evidence, he claims that the water molecule is the most common throughout the universe — water everywhere, “even on the sun, which is the largest planet in our solar system.””
Um.
I’m thinking he didn’t spend the eight years I did, as a physics major at BYU and a Ph.D. student in astronomy at Caltech, to acquire his expertise. Where do people come by such hubris? I understand hubris in genuinely educated people, even if I deplore it and Have to watch for it in myself, but this fellow doesn’t even have the excuse of relevant education.
Good job making it this far through the conference. I’m looking forward to reading more of your reports.
IMHO there’s nothing wrong with challenging the prevailing opinion when warrented — I’m an AGW skeptic myself — but you’ve got to do with with solid hypothesis and data, not just snark. Otherwise it’s just annoying hucksterism.