Subject: Barry Price Update Date: 9 May 1994 10:45 MST Barry Price and Ian Plimer were the

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins Subject: Barry Price Update Date: 9 May 1994 10:45 MST Organization: University of Arizona Message-ID: <9MAY199410453573@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> Barry Price and Ian Plimer were the subjects of criticism in my article "How Not to Argue with Creationists," which appeared in _Creation/Evolution_ in the Winter 1991-92 issue (copies available from me via email by request). Price wrote a lengthy reply which was trimmed down into "A Response to James Lippard" in the Winter 1992 issue of _Creation/Evolution_. The longer version was advertised as being available from Ian Plimer, but my requests for a copy (via both email and paper mail) were ignored. (I don't know if anyone ever requested and received a copy.) I obtained the longer version from _C/E_ editor John Cole, and wrote "How Not to Respond to Criticism: Barry Price Compounds His Errors" as a reply (available in /pub/origins on ics.uci.edu or from me via email). The following is an update on the situation which I just received from Carl Wieland, head of the Australian Creation Science Foundation. Lawsuit outcome: God is sovereign We can now share with you the final outcome of the legal action which was launched against us by a prominent anti-creationist (BP) some months ago. After Carl Wieland (CW) and Dr Andrew Snelling had withdrawn from a nationwide ABC radio program some time ago, BP said on air that CW had been under police investigation for fraud. Stunned by this false accusation and other innuendo on the program, we were prayerfully seeking wisdom from the Lord as to the correct course of action when a lawsuit from the same BP arrived, claiming that CSF had defamed him! (We had published a hard-hitting, factual response to a much-touted anti-CSF book he had written, which we had claimed was both misleading and defamatory in a number of places.) We had now been forcibly drawn into a legal fray which top Christian legal advisors informed us could mean we would have to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars from supporters to cover costs, even if successful. After further prayer and deliberation, a countersuit was launched against the said BP and the ABC, alleging defamation of CW. Subsequently we have been informed that the said BP was struck down with a serious and apparently permanent cerebral affliction, requiring 24-hour nursing care and making any further involvement in the lawsuit or the creation/evolution controversy highly unlikely, if not impossible. His case against CSF has now been dismissed by the NSW Supreme Court. In the other case involving CW, judgement has been entered against BP. We will not be pursuing costs or damages in view of his (and his family's) plight. The ABC has already broadcast a nationwide apology under an agreement to settle on reasonable terms. We thank all of you who prayed in this matter; the net costs to the ministry, though significant, have been a fraction of what could have been the case, and the integrity of CSF has been upheld at law. ABC Radio Apologizes--Again! On Sunday, 13 March, 1994, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation made the following statement via a nationwide radio broadcast: 'On 6 September 1992 we had a discussion on the program about Creation Science. Dr Carl Wieland, the Managing Director of Creation Science Foundation was, along with a colleague, an invited guest on the show. Both left early and there followed a discussion with Mr Barry Price who stated that Dr Wieland "had been under police fraud investigation for the past six months." 'The ABC accepts that this uninvited statement is untrue. The ABC apologizes to Dr Wieland for all and any harm suffered as a consequence of any material broadcast in the program.' (In 1989, the same organization issued a nationwide broadcast apology for false allegations concerning CSF finances, made by another leading anti-creationist.) Meanwhile, the CSF's technical journal has been publishing critiques of bad young-earth arguments, most recently of the "moon dust" argument. The March 1994 issue of the American _Creation Research Society Quarterly_ contains a letter from Wieland which announces the publication of the moon dust article, as well as offering criticism of another _CRSQ_ paper. Jim Lippard Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU Dept. of Philosophy Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET University of Arizona Tucson, AZ 85721 From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins Subject: Re: Barry Price Update Date: 9 May 1994 14:35 MST Organization: University of Arizona Message-ID: <9MAY199414352093@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> References: <9MAY199410453573@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> In article <9MAY199410453573@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu>, lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) writes... [From a Creation Science Foundation publication:] > After Carl Wieland (CW) and Dr Andrew Snelling had withdrawn > from a nationwide ABC radio program some time ago, BP said on air > that CW had been under police investigation for fraud. Stunned by > this false accusation and other innuendo on the program, we were [...] > On Sunday, 13 March, 1994, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation > made the following statement via a nationwide radio broadcast: > 'On 6 September 1992 we had a discussion on the program about > Creation Science. Dr Carl Wieland, the Managing Director of Creation > Science Foundation was, along with a colleague, an invited guest on > the show. Both left early and there followed a discussion with Mr > Barry Price who stated that Dr Wieland "had been under police fraud > investigation for the past six months." > 'The ABC accepts that this uninvited statement is untrue. The > ABC apologizes to Dr Wieland for all and any harm suffered as a > consequence of any material broadcast in the program.' I should note here (as I comment on in more detail in "How Not to Respond to Criticism") that the CSF (but not Wieland personally) *was* investigated by the Queensland Police Service Fraud and Corporate Crime Squad in November of 1992--but at the instigation of Barry Price (as a result of his erroneous analysis of the CSF's financial returns) and Mark Plummer (president of the Victorian Branch of the Australian Skeptics and former executive director of CSICOP). Detective Superintendent C. J. Crawford of the Queensland Fraud Squad reported on November 10, 1992 that "Inquiries ... have failed to substantiate any evidence that an offence has been committed with respect to the statute law of Queensland." The matter was then closed. In essence, what happened was that in the early eighties, the CSF, along with a bunch of other people, got ripped off by another company. The CSF lost a bunch of money which had been loaned at no interest by supporters for the purpose of investment, so that the CSF could use the interest earned. The CSF didn't say anything publicly, but did issue a statement to its biggest supporters in order to collect donations to pay back all of the interest-free loans, which it did. The Australian Skeptics learned about the loss by looking at the CSF's (publicly filed) returns, and made it public, to the CSF's embarrassment. Martin Bridgstock's article on the loss is quite accurate, though somewhat incomplete. Barry Price did his own analysis, and came to some odd conclusions as the result of a number of errors, including misreading some numbers in the returns. He apparently thought that some $9,000 was unaccounted for, and wrote in his book that a similar amount of money was paid to a member of the CSF's board of directors. This was completely wrong--there was no money unaccounted for, and Price got the name of a director who was paid $8118.75 (which Price misread as $8719) wrong. The director Price named had not been paid anything by the CSF, and he filed a defamation suit against Price, and the publisher withdrew Price's book. The director who had been paid was paid for working full-time for the CSF, on a weekly basis. Price apparently thought the above was a lump-sum payment that was close to the "missing" $9,000. I know of no evidence of the CSF engaging in any kind of financial fraud, but there is plenty of evidence of skeptics making all sorts of unsubstantiated and erroneous charges against the CSF. My analysis has been distributed all over the place, including to all of the principals involved and several members of the Australian Skeptics. None of them has challenged my account, and yet none of them have retracted any of the false statements I have documented in my articles. Once again, all of this is discussed in excruciating detail in my unpublished reply to Barry Price, "How Not to Respond to Criticism: Barry Price Compounds His Errors." Jim Lippard Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU Dept. of Philosophy Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET University of Arizona Tucson, AZ 85721

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank