Error-free Creationist Literature?

[Steviepinhead]

I can't find any online searchable copies, but if you're really curious, you can get the Gammon book for $2.22 plus shipping through Amazon--

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...nosim/ranra-20

[Steviepinhead]

Hmm. The Eisenhower Presidential Library appears not to contain any document with the terms "materialistic psychologists" or "smart-alec professors," for example.

But maybe someone more search-capable than I can give the library--
http://www.eisenhower.utexas.edu/

or the National Archives--Presidential Libraries--site:
http://www.archives.gov/presidential...es/search.html

--a whirl.

[BWE]

Hmm. The Eisenhower Presidential Library appears not to contain any document with the terms "materialistic psychologists" or "smart-alec professors," for example.

But maybe someone more search-capable than I can give the library--
http://www.eisenhower.utexas.edu/

or the National Archives--Presidential Libraries--site:
http://www.archives.gov/presidential...es/search.html

--a whirl.

That's the same thing I did. Amazon first, google books second, google third, Eisenhower library, then I gave up.

Since the default position on creationists is that they are lying unless they provide proof, I will simply assume he lied unless someone can dig up the speech. I'd be especially curious to know what was behing those ellipses. They seem to be in strategic places. Remember Dave's humdinger of egregious quotemine compounded with blatant lies about it regarding the founding fathers quote? Those ellipses sometimes mask something interesting.

[BWE]

Hmm. The Eisenhower Presidential Library appears not to contain any document with the terms "materialistic psychologists" or "smart-alec professors," for example.

But maybe someone more search-capable than I can give the library--
http://www.eisenhower.utexas.edu/

or the National Archives--Presidential Libraries--site:
http://www.archives.gov/presidential...es/search.html

--a whirl.

That's the same thing I did. Amazon first, google books second, google third, Eisenhower library, then I gave up.

Since the default position on creationists is that they are lying unless they provide proof, I will simply assume he lied unless someone can dig up the speech. I'd be especially curious to know what was behing those ellipses. They seem to be in strategic places. Remember Dave's humdinger of egregious quotemine compounded with blatant lies about it regarding the founding fathers quote? Those ellipses sometimes mask something interesting.

It's amazing how they lie about stuf that doesn't even matter. Like David Barton's abbreviated Madison quote which Dave posted the whopper quote-mine from. Why? Why lie when it wouldn't matter if you simply omitted the info?

[Coragyps]

though I suppose it might be interesting to find out if Eisenhower really used that "smart-alec professors" phrase.

I can't give you a quote, but phrases like "pointy-headed intellectuals" were associated pretty strongly with the noises that came from the Eisenhower/Nixon White House. I can well imagine Ike saying "smart-alec professors" as well.

[VoxRat]

though I suppose it might be interesting to find out if Eisenhower really used that "smart-alec professors" phrase.

I can't give you a quote, but phrases like "pointy-headed intellectuals" were associated pretty strongly with the noises that came from the Eisenhower/Nixon White House. I can well imagine Ike saying "smart-alec professors" as well.

It's just a little before my time, so I can't say. I may have been under the comfortable delusion that that kind of trash-talking came in with Nixon/Agnew. ("effete corps of impudent snobs", I believe was Agnew's cute phrase).

If Ike did say that - which I don't find all that unlikely - it is especially reprehensible given the times. I.e. the McCarthy witchhunt years. He then bears some responsibility for the public perception that atheism, communism, and "intellectuality" were all of a piece.

[Gagundathar Inexplicable]

though I suppose it might be interesting to find out if Eisenhower really used that "smart-alec professors" phrase.

I can't give you a quote, but phrases like "pointy-headed intellectuals" were associated pretty strongly with the noises that came from the Eisenhower/Nixon White House. I can well imagine Ike saying "smart-alec professors" as well.

It's just a little before my time, so I can't say. I may have been under the comfortable delusion that that kind of trash-talking came in with Nixon/Agnew. ("effete corps of impudent snobs", I believe was Agnew's cute phrase).

If Ike did say that - which I don't find all that unlikely - it is especially reprehensible given the times. I.e. the McCarthy witchhunt years. He then bears some responsibility for the public perception that atheism, communism, and "intellectuality" were all of a piece.

Don't forget about "nattering nabobs of negativity". That was my favorite.

Uh... I mean it would have been if I was like... uh... alive way back then.
Yeah... I heard it on the History Channel.
That's the ticket....

[ck1]

AIG has now published a new article (2008) on viruses and bacteria:

http://answersingenesis.org/contents...f-Creation.pdf

The article, by Liberty University professor Allan Gillen, is apparently based on a conference, Microbe Forum, held at the Creation Museum last June and organized by creationist Georgia Purdom.

The article rehashes many of the arguments found in the Bergman article, although, surprisingly, there is no reference to Bergman's article.

The article is even less "sciencey" than Bergman's: of the few (10) reference citations, 3 are microbiology texts, 6 are creationist sources and 1 is the bible (KJV).

Quite a bit of the article is spent trying to determine on what day of creation week microbes were created: day 3 with seed-bearing life or perhaps non-photosynthetic microbes were made on days 5/6 with animal life.

There is a "discussion" of symbiosis and a special section devoted to viruses and their origins: were viruses specially created because of their beneficial roles in controlling bacteria and generating diversity, or alternatively, did viruses "devolve" from other life forms as the result of the "Fall"?

ERVs are mentioned and it is claimed that these endogenous retroviruses have important functions - they are said to turn off the immune system during pregnancy and have other roles in reproduction (apparently a reference to syncytin).

As for the creationist Microbe conference, here is an overview along with the 6 abstracts that were presented:

http://answersingenesis.org/contents...robe-forum.pdf

(Those of you who have followed the afdave discussions will recognize Daniel Criswell among the abstract writers - he attempted to rebut arguments from Ed Max and gladiatrix on inherited errors in GULO.)

[damitall]

(Those of you who have followed the afdave discussions will recognize Daniel Criswell among the abstract writers - he attempted to rebut arguments from Ed Max and gladiatrix on inherited errors in GULO.)

Max's December 2007 rebuttal of creo claims of his being "misleading" at TalkOrigins is worth a read - unfortunately it massages Hawkins' ego, mentioning him specifically

[VoxRat]

(Those of you who have followed the afdave discussions will recognize Daniel Criswell among the abstract writers - he attempted to rebut arguments from Ed Max and gladiatrix on inherited errors in GULO.)

Max's December 2007 rebuttal of creo claims of his being "misleading" at TalkOrigins is worth a read - unfortunately it massages Hawkins' ego, mentioning him specifically

Link?

[ck1]

(Those of you who have followed the afdave discussions will recognize Daniel Criswell among the abstract writers - he attempted to rebut arguments from Ed Max and gladiatrix on inherited errors in GULO.)

Max's December 2007 rebuttal of creo claims of his being "misleading" at TalkOrigins is worth a read - unfortunately it massages Hawkins' ego, mentioning him specifically

Link?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/molgen/afdave.html

Actually, Ed wrote this rebuttal with the intention of posting it at RD when the afdave/Criswell/gladiatrix GULO discussion was going on. However, the day Ed showed up to post this at RD, the mods had shut down the "Lucy" thread that was being used for this topic, and the afdave discussion had moved on to another topic on another thread. So rather than try to to resuscitate the GULO discussion on RD, Ed decided to append his comments to his talkorigins article.

[Just A Theory]

Having followed the link to this thread from RD.net, I just want to say a huge thank you to VoxRat for his superb dissection of Bergman. I did a 4 post one of my own in a recent thread there and would invite any comments or criticisms.

Again, thanks for VoxRat for reminding me how interesting virology is (I haven't done any since my Honours year). :thumbup1:

[LuisGarcia]

Ok, with some help from several people, we've archived VoxRats analysis of the Bergman article here, as a wiki article. Please do feel free to use it as a resource.

Which deserves two comments. Firstly, while I'm far behind most of you in brain power, I'm happy to do the donkey work of this kind of archiving, so if anyone feels a thread here should be turned into an article, or would like help writing a page or article, please do let me know via PM.

Secondly, it's Dave's lucky day.

Has anyone compiled a linked list of Voxrat's criticisms? This thread is rather long to wade through and find them all.

Yes, we have now. Would you like to comment, Dave.

[VoijaRisa]

I've got a few refutations of some AiG articles. One by Griggs and one by Safariti.

Both are on astronomy since that's my field and were written back when I was a sophomore. It's pathetic that a sophomore knows more about science than these clowns that supposedly have PhDs.