In an earlier posting, I quoted David Tyler's views about evolution and the peppered moth story [Peppered Moths and the Confused IDiots]. I didn't know who David Tyler was but he's obviously considered to be an authority (i.e., prominent IDiot) by Denyse O'Leary, among others.Since posting that article, I've become more informed about this man. I thought I'd share this information so that everyone will know who's considered to be a leading IDiot on evolution.
David Tyler is a Young Earth Creationist who belongs to The Biblical Creation Society. Tyler believes in the literal truth of Genesis. It's no wonder that he has some doubts since there's nothing in Genesis about peppered moths.
Tyler has a day job. He is a Senior Lecturer (Professor, in North American terms) in the Department of Clothing Design and Technology, Hollings Faculty of Food, Clothing & Hospitality Management, Manchester Metropolitan University [Homepage for David J. Tyler]. He has a Ph.D. in physical sciences and his current interests focus on the textile industry, according to the Manchester Metropolitan University [Dr. David Tyere].
After joining the Department of Clothing Design and Technology at Manchester Metropolitan University, he has pursued a number of research interests related to responsive manufacturing and systems modelling. Earlier work was concerned with flow line systems and management strategies to optimise performance. Research interests over the past decade relate to teamworking in new product development and its relation to operational practices, and the optimisation of performance of textile/apparel supply chains. Since March 2000, he has managed the North West Advanced Apparel Systems Centre, a European-funded initiative to support clothing and textile companies in NW England.This is an example of the sort of expert the IDiots think is a good spokesman for Intelligent Design Creationism: a Young Earth Creationist (YEC) with no obvious background in biology.
I really don't understand people like Denyse O'Leary and some of her friends. Denyse is Roman Catholic. She is not a Young Earth Creationist. How can she put any faith in the credibility of a man who thinks that science is compatible with a 6000-year-old Earth?
10 comments :
Why, it's very simple, Larry.
In O'Leary's brand of "journalism", anyone who agrees with her is an expert worth being quoted. Anyone who disagrees is a 'militant atheist' or 'dogmatic Darwinist'.
Dave was also interviewed a while back on the BBC regarding creationism.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/breakfast/4236735.stm
In terms of geology, Dave has an annoying tendency to try and present himself as an objective researcher, simply following the facts, exploring the possibility of new paradigms and employing the principle of multiple working hypotheses. It's an irritating rhetorical trick, but he is at least polite and civil and doesn't give the impression of being a complete arsehole (unlike some prominent creationists).
Does any of his research include methods to avoid contamination of one fabric with threads of another? I'm led to understand that is also not allowed under literal interpretations of the bible.
I really don't understand people like Denyse O'Leary and some of her friends. Denyse is Roman Catholic. She is not a Young Earth Creationist. How can she put any faith in the credibility of a man who thinks that science is compatible with a 6000-year-old Earth?
Have you ever successfully corrected O'Leary on even the most trivial detail? The last thing a soldier wants to learn is the truth.
Larry said – “David Tyler … believes in the literal truth of Genesis.”
Please note, Larry, that your use of the word “literal” is only half right. Interpreting the word ‘day’ in Genesis I as an epoch is also a “literal” interpretation. When the word ‘day’ is taken as an epoch (long period of time), as progressive creationists do, the Genesis I record concening natural events and their sequence is completely consistent with contemporary science and cosmology.
Why do you fixate on the young-Earthers so much?
Dragon
He has a Ph.D. in physical sciences
Hmm. He is shy, but it seems it is the right person and that he may have B.Sc. and M.Sc. in Physics; Ph.D. in Management Science. That is consistent with a background in the physical sciences, but if "management science" covers production methods (or at least that is what his paper output concerns) it is engineering science.
How can she put any faith in the credibility of a man who thinks that science is compatible with a 6000-year-old Earth?
The Wedge is out to replace all "materialist science" because it isn't Truthiness.
the Genesis I record concening natural events and their sequence is completely consistent with contemporary science and cosmology.
Huh? The Earth was created in Gen 1:1 and the sun in Gen 1:3. Why shouldn't we despise YEC's?
Btw, Gen 1 completely inconsistent with the Gen 2 record. Why shouldn't we deride YEC's?
Well, a professor in the clothing department should know a thing or two about moths (viz., what fabrics they're inclined to eat, the effectiveness of mothballs . . .).
I am interested in Mr. (Dr.? Rev??) Tyler as he recently 'blogged' one of my papers as somehow supporting ID. Since I appreciate any links to my papers, I'd like to send him a little thank-you note, but I can't find an email for him anywhere online ... weird for an 'academic'... is anybody here a more powerful Googler, or more willing spelunker into the depths of ID/YEC-world that can figure out how to contact him?
Thanks.
David Tyler is my uncle.
Post a Comment