SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Interior Department is facing a lawsuit from a Christian geologist who claims he was not allowed to collect rocks from Grand Canyon National Park because of his creationist beliefs.
In the suit filed earlier this month, the Australian geologist, Andrew Snelling, says that religious discrimination was behind the National Park Service's (NRS's) decision to deny him a permit to gather samples from four locations in the park.
Snelling had hoped to gather the rocks to support the creationist belief that a global flood about 4,300 years ago was responsible for rock layers and fossil deposits around the world.
NPS's actions "demonstrate animus towards the religious viewpoints of Dr. Snelling," the complaint alleges, "and violate Dr. Snelling's free exercise rights by imposing inappropriate and unnecessary religious tests to his access to the park."
The lawsuit was filed May 9 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. NPS has yet to respond to the allegations.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday May 28 2017, @11:43PM (2 children)
Let's say they let him collect those samples -- and have another geologist and a park ranger follow him around. He then chooses the samples, collects them, and splits them at the collection spot with the geologist. Afterwards, he gets to use the samples to prove his point; and the geologist has the option to similarly examine them and provide an alternative, and likely peer-reviewable analysis, against the same rocks -- or make the examination/analysis part of an undergrad lab in a geology class. If you really want to be extra safe, you could require the researchers swap samples after they were done with them.
That wouldn't be discriminatory, now would it?
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday May 29 2017, @12:10AM (1 child)
Why? What a waste of time, human resources, money and in the end, no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to make him or other creationists believe they are mistaken. Blind faith is inherently irrational, and it is inherently irrational to expect rational behavior from creationists. Subjecting the proposal to peer review is good enough
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 29 2017, @01:38PM
Why? Because for every loud mouthed holier than thou holy rolling bible thumper who vehemently sticks to their dogma, there are 3 or 4 quieter sitting on the fence I don't really believe all of this and I'm largely doing this because my parents did this types that might actually listen. This man whom I will refuse to call a scientist is obviously one of the dogmatic ones. Those who are completely deluded are lost, but not all are not equally deluded and can change with enough of the right circumstances. No there are not some magical words to say to make the extremely devout instantly disavow their beliefs, but the fence sitters are the ones we need to do the kind of things like a simultaneous peer review. I'd say if one person where to change their thinking then it's with it. We can "save" the fence sitters from "being saved"