==* TOFAQICRCRED ICR CREDENTIALS BAUGH BURDICK BLISS Article 27663 of talk.origins: Subjec

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

Skeptic Tank!

==* TO_FAQ_ICR_CRED ICR CREDENTIALS BAUGH BURDICK BLISS Article 27663 of talk.origins: Newsgroups: talk.origins From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) Subject: Re: ICR Faculty Credentials Message-ID: Sender: news@qualcomm.com Nntp-Posting-Host: cancun.qualcomm.com Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA References: <1992Jun18.093307.22165@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> <1992Jun18.181240.236892@cs.cmu.edu> <1992Jun18.212619.26910@infonode.ingr.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1992 03:23:23 GMT Lines: 103 Here's what I have... some of it is on the CSRC, ICR's incestuous sister organization. Morris is a hydrologist. Gish is a biochemist. Most creation scientists with a Ph.D. after their names are actually engineers. The rest of this is from a file I found without an attribution. If it's from someone here, stand and be recognized! The source of the information on colleges and universities is from "Bear's Guide to Earning Non-Traditional College Degrees," 10th Ed. Where used below, the word "Accreditation" refers to accreditation by one of the recognized Regional Accrediting Agencies, OR by the (legitimate) American Association of Bible Colleges. California has a three tier system: At the low end are "Authorized" schools. More highly scrutinized are "Approved" schools. "Accredited" schools are accredited by the regional Accrediting Agency. Dr. Carl Baugh, a fundamentalist Missouri Baptist minister with no scientific background, claims to be an archaeologist. He also claims to have a Ph.D. from the California Graduate School of Theology in Glendale. When a local skeptic checked with the primary organization responsible for accreditation (The Western Association of Schools and Colleges), he was informed that this "graduate school" has not been accredited. Reverend Baugh claims to have found "human" footprints that measure nearly forty inches from heel to toe. California Graduate School of Theology is "Approved" by the state of California (A step up from "Authorized.") but is not accredited. All degrees are in theology. Credit is given for "experiential learning." Dr. Richard Bliss, a member of the ICR staff, has claimed to have a D.Ed. from the University of Sarasota located in Florida. In the 1984 spring issue of "Scientific Integrity", William V. Mayer pointed out that this university has been characterized by the "Philadelphia Inquirer" as a diploma mill in a Florida motel (see Lovejoy's College Catalog). Bliss has accused evolutionary scientists of "intellectual dishonesty". He also claims to be "a recognized expert in the field of science education" and is co-author of a "two-model" book that is being pushed for use in the public school system. Bear lists the "University of Sarasota" as a "short residency" (total residency may be as short as six weeks) school. The school is the equivalent of California "Approved," but is not accredited. Dr. Clifford Burdick of the CSRC (Creation Science Research Center) is a "flood" geologist who has spent forty years trying to prove that giant humans once roamed the earth and even mingled with the dinosaurs. Burdick has displayed a copy of his Ph.D. from the University of Physical Sciences (Phoenix, Arizona) in the Glen Rose Creation Evidence Museum. However, the State of Arizona Board of Regents, the University of Arizona Department of Geology, and the Arizona State Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology have never heard of this "university." Bear hasn't heard of this school either. There appears to be a "University of Psychic Sciences," in National City, California. Dr. Kelly Segraves, director of the CSRC, listed himself as M.A. and D.Sc. on the 1975 CSRC letterhead. After having it called into question, Segraves dropped the D.Sc. in 1981 and now lists "D.R.E." in its place. Segraves has claimed that his D.Sc. is honorary from Christian University, yet a computer search indicated that the only university with that name is located in Jakarta, Indonesia. The next closest match is a Bible College called Indiana Christian University (see below). Segraves claims to have received his M.A. from Sequoia University in 1972 but Bette Chambers discovered that there is no such place. The closest name match is a Sequoia College in California, which only offers two year associate degrees and has no record of any student named Kelly Segraves. Note that "D.R.E." is a doctorate of religious education and does not qualify as a scientific degree. There are or were several "National Christian University," in Richardson, (Texas), Dallas, and apparently Oklahoma City and/or Missouri. Bear can offer no other information, except that "National Christian" appears on a European list of degree mills. There is a "Christian International University" in Phoenix, Arizona (which was established in Texas in 1967, and moved to Arizona in 1977 when "the Lord provided a central home"). The only staff member listed as having a Doctorate is the President, whose degree is from...National Christian University. CIU is the the equivalent of California "Authorized," but not Accredited. Sequoia University did exist, in California and Oklahoma, but a judge in Los Angeles, in 1984, issued a permanent injunction to cease operations "until it complies with the state education laws." The "university" offered degrees in osteopathic medicine, religious studies, hydrotherapy, and physical sciences. Dr. Harold S. Slusher of the ICR claims to have an honorary D.Sc. from Indiana Christian University and a Ph.D. from Columbia Pacific University. Robert J. Schadewald recently discovered that Indiana Christian University is a Bible College with only a 1/2 man graduate science department, and Columbia Pacific University is nonaccredited. "Indiana Christian University" is unknown to Bear. Columbia Pacific University, in San Rafael, California, is California "Approved," but not Accredited. Of listed faculty, 23% have their own Doctorate from ... Columbia Pacific University. -- You will have a nightmare in which Israel and Syria appear as guest stars on "Too Close For Comfort." ==! ==* ICR CREDENTIALS FACULTY Article 29676 of talk.origins: From: bgarwood@sngldsh.cv.nrao.edu (Bob Garwood) Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: Re: ICR Faculty update Message-ID: Date: 5 Aug 92 19:14:41 GMT References: <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> Sender: news@nrao.edu Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory Lines: 49 In-Reply-To: allenroy@rigel.cs.pdx.edu's message of 5 Aug 92 16: 46:51 GMT In article <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> allenroy@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (callen roy) writes: >=Here is a fairly complete listing ICR faculty and their degrees, taken >=from the 1987-1988 ICR Graduate School catalog. I have added, in >=parentheses, the fields in which they received their degrees, whenever >=I was able find this information. You'll note that some very >=well-known and respected universities are represented. > >=Mark Kuehne >=kuehne@nwu.edu > >There have been some names added to the list. Additional information on >some of the professors has been noted. And, Current titles are corrected. >a * marks the professors who were once Evolutionists. > >C. Allen Roy > > Adjunct Faculty > >DeYoung Donald B..........................Professor of Astrophysics > B.S., Michigan Technical University, 1966 > M.S., Michigan Technical University, 1968 > Ph.D. (Physics), Iowa State University, 1972 > --------------- Since astrophysics is my field, I thought I'ld try and check up on this guy. In _American Men and Women of Science_, 18th edition, 1989-90, DeYoung is also shown to have the following degree: MDiv., Grace Theol. Sem. 1981 In addition, as of that edition, it lists him as being an Associate Prof of physics at Grace Col. in Winona Lake, Ind. For research, it gives "Mossbauer effect studies of transition metal borides." There is no indication in this book of any background or expertise in astrphysics. It classifies him as "SOLID STATE SCIENCE". Furthermore, a check of the Astronomy and Astrophysics Abstracts shows no publication by a Donald DeYoung in any of the many journals that they track. He clearly is NOT an astrophysicist (although he may play one at the ICR). Bob Garwood National Radio Astronomy Observatory -- ==! ==* ICR FACULTY CREDENTIALS CITATIONS Article 29693 of talk.origins: From: slinke@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Steven Linke) Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: Re: ICR Faculty update Message-ID: <36554@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> Date: 6 Aug 92 06:19:04 GMT References: <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> Sender: news@sdcc12.ucsd.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 125 Nntp-Posting-Host: sdcc3.ucsd.edu In article <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> allenroy@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (callen roy) writes: > >There have been some names added to the list. Additional information on >some of the professors has been noted. And, Current titles are corrected. >a * marks the professors who were once Evolutionists. > >C. Allen Roy I did a Medline search (biology, biochemistry, medicine, etc.) for the past 4 1/2 years on all the members of the ICR that are supposedly in these fields. The results follow: >Cumming, Kenneth B...Dean: ICR Grad School;.Professor of Biology > B.S., Tufts University, 1956 > M.A., Harvard University, 1959 > Ph.D. (Biology), Harvard University, 1965 *****0 citations***** >Gish, Duane T.............................Vice President > B.S., University of California, Los Angeles, 1949 > Ph.D. (Biochemistry), University of California, Berkeley, 1953 > American Men of Science *****0 citations***** >Englin, Dennis L...Professor of Geophysics > B.A., (Biology, Chemistry) Westmont College, 1968 > M.Sc., (Biology) California State University, 1970 > Ed.D., University of Southern California 1975 *****0 citations***** >* Parker, Gary E...Adjunct Professor of Biology > B.A., Wabash College, 1962 > M.S., Ball State University, 1965 > Ed.D., (Major: Biology, Minor: Paleontology) Ball State > University, 1973 Phi Beta Kappa > National Science Foundation Fellowship recipient *****0 citations***** >Fliermans, Carl B...Adjunct Professor, Biology Department > Ph.D. (Microbiology), Indiana University, 1972 *****1 citation***** Author: Tyndall RL; Ironside KS; Metler PL; Tan EL; Hazen TC; Fliermans CB. Address: Zoology Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville 37796-0816. Title: Effect of thermal additions on the density and distribution of thermophilic amoebae and pathogenic Naegleria fowleri in a newly created cooling lake. Journal: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1989 Mar, 55(3):722-32. >Franks, Robert H...Adjunct Faculty, Biology Department > M.D., UCLA, Los Angeles, California, 1960 *****0 citations***** >* Kouznetsov, Dmitri A...Adjunct Professor > M.D., I. M. Sechenov School of Medicine, 1978 > Ph.D. (Biochemistry), Moscow M. V. Lomonosov State University, 1981 > D. Sc. (Molecular Biology), U.S.S.R. Academy of Medical Sciences > Institute for Nutrition Research, 1989 > Lenin Komsomol Prize, 1983 *****0 citations***** >Lester, Lane P...Adjunct Professor of Biology > Ph.D. (Genetics), Purdue University, 1971 *****0 citations***** >Lubenow, Marvin L...Adjunct Professor, Biology Department > M.S. (Physical Science), Eastern Michigan, 1976 > Th.M., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1954 *****0 citations***** >Lumsden, Richard D...Professor of Biology > Ph.D. (Biology), Rice, 1965 *****1 citation***** Author: Hildreth MB; Lumsden RD. Title: Utilization and absorption of carbohydrates by the plerocercus metacestode of Otobothrium insigne (Cestoda: Trypanorhyncha). Journal: International Journal for Parasitology, 1988 Mar, 18(2):251-7. >Meyer, John R...Adjunct Faculty, Biology Department > Ph.D. (Zoology), University of Iowa, 1969 *****1 citation***** Author: Page CD; Mautino M; Meyer JR; Mechlinski W. Address: Jacksonville Zoo, FL 32218. Title: Preliminary pharmacokinetics of ketoconazole in gopher tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus). Journal: Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 1988 Dec, 11(4):397-401. >Osborne, Chris D...Visiting Ass't. Professor of Biology > Ph.D. (Biology) Loma Linda University, 1989 California Biological Society *****0 citations***** So, out of twelve faculty members in this field, only three papers were published. And I'm not even sure about the three papers I listed. If there is another researcher who has the same last name and initials, they may be screwed up. -- Steve Linke Salk Institute (Gene Expression Lab) La Jolla, CA ==! ==* ICR FACULTY LIST DEGREES Article 29668 of talk.origins: From: allenroy@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (callen roy) Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: ICR Faculty update Message-ID: <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> Date: 5 Aug 92 16:46:51 GMT Sender: news@pdxgate.UUCP Lines: 159 =Here is a fairly complete listing ICR faculty and their degrees, taken =from the 1987-1988 ICR Graduate School catalog. I have added, in =parentheses, the fields in which they received their degrees, whenever =I was able find this information. You'll note that some very =well-known and respected universities are represented. =Mark Kuehne =kuehne@nwu.edu There have been some names added to the list. Additional information on some of the professors has been noted. And, Current titles are corrected. a * marks the professors who were once Evolutionists. C. Allen Roy Faculty Aardsma, Gerald E...........Assistant Professor of Physics ...........Coordinator of Research B.Sc., University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1978 M.Sc., University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1979 Ph.D. (Nuclear Physics), University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1984 Austin, Steven A......................Professor and Chairman of Geology B.S., University of Washington, 1970 M.S., San Jose State University, 1971 Ph.D. (Geology), Pennsylvania State University, 1979 * Bliss, Richard B....................Director of Curriculum Development ....................Chairman of Science Education Dept. B.S., University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire, 1953 M.S., University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1961 Ed.D. (Science Education Emphasis), University of Sarasota, 1978 Cumming, Kenneth B............Dean: ICR Grad School;.Professor of Biology B.S., Tufts University, 1956 M.A., Harvard University, 1959 Ph.D. (Biology), Harvard University, 1965 Gish, Duane T.............................Vice President B.S., University of California, Los Angeles, 1949 Ph.D. (Biochemistry), University of California, Berkeley, 1953 American Men of Science Ham, Kenneth A......................Director of Seminars and Conferences B.App.Sc., Queensland Institute of Technology, Australia, 1974 Dip.Ed. (Science Teaching), University of Queensland, Australia, 1975 McQueen, David R.....................Assistant Professor of Geology A.S., Southeastern Christian College, 1972 B.A., University of Tennessee, 1974 M.S., University of Michigan, 1979 Morris, Henry M..............................President of ICR ..............................Professor of Hydrology B.S., Rice University, 1939 M.S., University of Minnesota, 1948 Ph.D., University of Minnesota, 1950 LL.D., Bob Jones University, 1966 Morris, John D.......................Administrative Vice President .......................Professor of Geology B.S., Virginia Tech., 1969 M.S., University of Oklahoma, 1977 Ph.D., University of Oklahoma, 1980 Vardiman, Larry........................Chairman, Physicis Department B.S., University of Missouri, 1965 B.S., St. Louis University, 1967 M.S., Colorado State University, 1974 Ph.D., (Atmospheric Science) Colorado State University, 1974 Adjunct Faculty DeYoung Donald B..........................Professor of Astrophysics B.S., Michigan Technical University, 1966 M.S., Michigan Technical University, 1968 Ph.D. (Physics), Iowa State University, 1972 Englin, Dennis L............................Professor of Geophysics B.A., (Biology, Chemistry) Westmont College, 1968 M.Sc., (Biology) California State University, 1970 Ed.D., University of Southern California 1975 Lindsey, George D..........Adjunct Faculty, Science Education Dept. B.S., East Texas State University, 1967 M.S., East Texas State University, 1968 Ed.D., East Texas State University, 1981 Morris, Andrew H.................Assistant Professor of Mathematics B.S., Bob Jones University, 1971 M.B.A., National University, 1980 Ph.D., Texas Technological University, 1987 * Parker, Gary E...........................Adjunct Professor of Biology B.A., Wabash College, 1962 M.S., Ball State University, 1965 Ed.D., (Major: Biology, Minor: Paleontology) Ball State University, 1973 Phi Beta Kappa National Science Foundation Fellowship recipient Unfred, David....................Assistant Professor of Mathematics B.Sc., Texas Tech University, 1968 M.Sc., Texas Tech University, 1972 M.B.A., University of Northern Colorado, 1978 Varughese, T. V..................Associate Professor of Mathematics B.Sc., Kerala University, India, 1954 B.Sc., Kerala University, India, 1958 B.Ed., Kerala University, India, 1959 M.Sc., Kerala University, India, 1963 M.A., Indiana University, 1971 Ph.D., Indiana University, 1975 I put together the rest of this listing from ICR Faculty Profiles, published by ICR over the past couple of years. As a result, not all of the entries are complete. Chittick, Donald E............Adjunct Professor Ph.D. (Physical Chemistry), Oregon State University Fliermans, Carl B.............Adjunct Professor, Biology Department Ph.D. (Microbiology), Indiana University, 1972 Franks, Robert H................Adjunct Faculty, Biology Department M.D., UCLA, Los Angeles, California, 1960 Humphreys, D. Russell...........Adjunct Faculty, Physics Department Ph.D (Physics), Louisiana State University, 1972 * Kouznetsov, Dmitri A..............................Adjunct Professor M.D., I. M. Sechenov School of Medicine, 1978 Ph.D. (Biochemistry), Moscow M. V. Lomonosov State University, 1981 D. Sc. (Molecular Biology), U.S.S.R. Academy of Medical Sciences Institute for Nutrition Research, 1989 Lenin Komsomol Prize, 1983 Lester, Lane P.........................Adjunct Professor of Biology Ph.D. (Genetics), Purdue University, 1971 Lubenow, Marvin L.............Adjunct Professor, Biology Department M.S. (Physical Science), Eastern Michigan, 1976 Th.M., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1954 Lumsden, Richard D.............................Professor of Biology Ph.D. (Biology), Rice, 1965 Meyer, John R...................Adjunct Faculty, Biology Department Ph.D. (Zoology), University of Iowa, 1969 Osborne, Chris D...................Visiting Ass't. Professor of Biology Ph.D. (Biology) Loma Linda University, 1989 California Biological Society Snelling, Andrew A..............Adjunct Professor of Geology Ph.D. (Geology) The University of Sydney, 1981 -------- ==! ==* ICR FACULTY DEGREES CITATIONS Article 29693 of talk.origins: Path: cse.uta.edu!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!network.ucsd.edu!sdcc12!sdcc3!slinke From: slinke@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Steven Linke) Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: Re: ICR Faculty update Message-ID: <36554@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> Date: 6 Aug 92 06:19:04 GMT References: <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> Sender: news@sdcc12.ucsd.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 125 Nntp-Posting-Host: sdcc3.ucsd.edu In article <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> allenroy@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (callen roy) writes: > >There have been some names added to the list. Additional information on >some of the professors has been noted. And, Current titles are corrected. >a * marks the professors who were once Evolutionists. > >C. Allen Roy I did a Medline search (biology, biochemistry, medicine, etc.) for the past 4 1/2 years on all the members of the ICR that are supposedly in these fields. The results follow: >Cumming, Kenneth B...Dean: ICR Grad School;.Professor of Biology > B.S., Tufts University, 1956 > M.A., Harvard University, 1959 > Ph.D. (Biology), Harvard University, 1965 *****0 citations***** >Gish, Duane T.............................Vice President > B.S., University of California, Los Angeles, 1949 > Ph.D. (Biochemistry), University of California, Berkeley, 1953 > American Men of Science *****0 citations***** >Englin, Dennis L...Professor of Geophysics > B.A., (Biology, Chemistry) Westmont College, 1968 > M.Sc., (Biology) California State University, 1970 > Ed.D., University of Southern California 1975 *****0 citations***** >* Parker, Gary E...Adjunct Professor of Biology > B.A., Wabash College, 1962 > M.S., Ball State University, 1965 > Ed.D., (Major: Biology, Minor: Paleontology) Ball State > University, 1973 Phi Beta Kappa > National Science Foundation Fellowship recipient *****0 citations***** >Fliermans, Carl B...Adjunct Professor, Biology Department > Ph.D. (Microbiology), Indiana University, 1972 *****1 citation***** Author: Tyndall RL; Ironside KS; Metler PL; Tan EL; Hazen TC; Fliermans CB. Address: Zoology Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville 37796-0816. Title: Effect of thermal additions on the density and distribution of thermophilic amoebae and pathogenic Naegleria fowleri in a newly created cooling lake. Journal: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1989 Mar, 55(3):722-32. >Franks, Robert H...Adjunct Faculty, Biology Department > M.D., UCLA, Los Angeles, California, 1960 *****0 citations***** >* Kouznetsov, Dmitri A...Adjunct Professor > M.D., I. M. Sechenov School of Medicine, 1978 > Ph.D. (Biochemistry), Moscow M. V. Lomonosov State University, 1981 > D. Sc. (Molecular Biology), U.S.S.R. Academy of Medical Sciences > Institute for Nutrition Research, 1989 > Lenin Komsomol Prize, 1983 *****0 citations***** >Lester, Lane P...Adjunct Professor of Biology > Ph.D. (Genetics), Purdue University, 1971 *****0 citations***** >Lubenow, Marvin L...Adjunct Professor, Biology Department > M.S. (Physical Science), Eastern Michigan, 1976 > Th.M., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1954 *****0 citations***** >Lumsden, Richard D...Professor of Biology > Ph.D. (Biology), Rice, 1965 *****1 citation***** Author: Hildreth MB; Lumsden RD. Title: Utilization and absorption of carbohydrates by the plerocercus metacestode of Otobothrium insigne (Cestoda: Trypanorhyncha). Journal: International Journal for Parasitology, 1988 Mar, 18(2):251-7. >Meyer, John R...Adjunct Faculty, Biology Department > Ph.D. (Zoology), University of Iowa, 1969 *****1 citation***** Author: Page CD; Mautino M; Meyer JR; Mechlinski W. Address: Jacksonville Zoo, FL 32218. Title: Preliminary pharmacokinetics of ketoconazole in gopher tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus). Journal: Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 1988 Dec, 11(4):397-401. >Osborne, Chris D...Visiting Ass't. Professor of Biology > Ph.D. (Biology) Loma Linda University, 1989 California Biological Society *****0 citations***** So, out of twelve faculty members in this field, only three papers were published. And I'm not even sure about the three papers I listed. If there is another researcher who has the same last name and initials, they may be screwed up. -- Steve Linke Salk Institute (Gene Expression Lab) La Jolla, CA ==! ==* ICR FACULTY CITATIONS CARBON14 Article 29705 of talk.origins: Newsgroups: talk.origins From: hyde@cs.dal.ca (Bill Hyde) Subject: Re: ICR Faculty update Message-ID: Sender: usenet@cs.dal.ca (USENET News) Nntp-Posting-Host: ice.atm.dal.ca Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada References: <5968@pdxgate.UUCP> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1992 16:12:43 GMT Lines: 45 In article <5968@pdxgate.UUCP>, allenroy@rigel.cs.pdx.edu (callen roy) writes: |> |> =Here is a fairly complete listing ICR faculty and their degrees, taken |> =from the 1987-1988 ICR Graduate School catalog. I have added, in |> =parentheses, the fields in which they received their degrees, whenever |> =I was able find this information. You'll note that some very |> =well-known and respected universities are represented. |> |> =Mark Kuehne |> =kuehne@nwu.edu |> |> There have been some names added to the list. Additional information on |> some of the professors has been noted. And, Current titles are corrected. |> a * marks the professors who were once Evolutionists. |> |> C. Allen Roy |> |> Faculty |> |> Aardsma, Gerald E...........Assistant Professor of Physics |> ...........Coordinator of Research |> B.Sc., University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1978 |> M.Sc., University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada, 1979 |> Ph.D. (Nuclear Physics), University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1984 |> | Was he not the one who wrote an article in "Acts and Facts" about two years ago calling on his fellow creationists to acknowledge the reliability of radiocarbon dating? I remember it because it was a remarkable argument to see in that publication, and because Aardsma was apparently a student at U of T physics at the same time I was. Of course, the fact that one of their number (and the one with the best physics qualifications, yet) acknowledges the reliability of such dating doesn't stop the rest of ICR from continuing to spout nonsense about it. Bill Hyde Department of Oceanography Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia hyde@Ice.ATM.Dal.Ca or hyde@dalac ==! ==* ICR SCICRE_LIE WHITCOMB MORRIS GEOLOGY REFS Article 29167 of talk.origins: Newsgroups: talk.origins From: sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley) Subject: Re: Calling Young-earth Creationists Message-ID: <1992Jul25.215359.2061@scic.intel.com> Organization: Intel SCIC, Beaverton, OR References: <1992Jul23.115606.202088@uctvax.uct.ac.za> Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 21:53:59 GMT Lines: 493 In article cmaier@uiuc.edu writes: >Your best source for info would be: > >The Institute for Creation Research >P.O. Box 2667 >El Cajon, CA 92091 > >I have most of their materials and have participated in most of their activities >over the past several years. They are an effective and dedicated group of >Christian scientists (and are thus constantly besmirched by the denizens of >this newsgroup) who publish on the scientific evidence for a young earth and >flood geology and immutability of created biological prototypes. Please comment on the following lies made by the ICR. Its's the ICR which "besmirches" the name of science: ----- Article: 1595 of talk.origins From: max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com Newsgroups: talk.origins Subject: ICR whopper sampler Message-ID: <1992Jun23.052333.3735@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com> Date: 23 Jun 92 05:23:33 GMT Sender: max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb) Organization: Cypress Semiconductor Northwest, Beaverton Oregon Lines: 457 This is a small sampler of creationist whoppers, gleaned from talk.origins in recent months. When I wrote that I had sent an unnamed creationist a small sampler of ICR whoppers, many people wrote and asked for a copy. I have much more distributed throughout my file system, and in books and on paper at home, but have not yet had a chance to gather them together. [plus my @#$!ing mailer seems to be broken. Sorry to those who wrote me and got no reply...] So many liars, so little time! Until then, here is what I had sent to the creationist in question.. If you would like to enter your favorite creationist lie, mendacious misquotation or attack of amnesia, please mail them to me here, and much honor and glory will accrue to your name. Well, maybe a little. >From Rob Zuber: ... QUESTION: According to creationists, there are plenty of places where the fossils are in the wrong order for evolution. This must mean geologists have to assume evolution so as to arrange the geological time scale so as to date the fossils so as to erect an evolutionary sequence so as to prove evolution, thereby reasoning in a vicious circle. When the fossils are in the wrong order, geologists apparently assume the "older" rocks were shoved on top of the younger ones (thrust faulting), or else that the strata were overturned (recumbent folds), even though there is no physical evidence for these processes. In particular, Whitcomb and Morris [2] maintain the physical evidence proves the Lewis Overthrust and Heart Mountain Overthrust never slid an inch. How do you reply? ANSWER: Whitcomb and Morris, again, quote their sources badly out of context. There is plenty of physical evidence having nothing to do with fossils or evolution that show thrust faulting to be very real. Let us consider the Lewis Overthrust and Heart Mountain Overthrust [I've deleted the Heart Mountain bit] in some detail. The Lewis Overthrust of Glacier National Park, Montana, consists of the deformed Precambrian limestones of the Belt Formation that were shoved along a horizontal thrust fault on top of much younger (but viciously crumpled) Cretaceous shales. ...[deletion]... Ross and Rezak [3] wrote in their article about the Lewis Overthrust that the rocks along the thrust fault are badly crumpled, but Whitcomb and Morris (p. 187) lift the following words from this article: "Most visitors, especially those who stay on the roads, get the impression that the Belt strata are undisturbed and lie almost as flat today as they did when deposited in the sea which vanished so many million years ago." But if we read the rest of Ross's and Rezak's paragraph, we find that Whitcomb and Morris quoted it out of context: ".... so many million years ago. Actually, they are folded, and in certain places, they are intensely so. From the points on and near the trails in the park, it is possible to observe places where the Belt series, as revealed in outcrops on ridges, cliffs, and canyon walls, are folded and crumpled almost as intricately as the soft younger strata in the mountains south of the park and in the Great Plains adjoining the park to the east." Ross and Rezak repeatedly show how "crushed and crumpled" the rocks in the thrust fault are: "The intricate crumpling and crushing in the immediate vicinity of the main overthrust, visible in localities like that near Marias Pass, shown in figure 139, must have taken place when the heavy overthrust slab was forced over the soft rocks beneath......" Now it certainly *appears* that Whitcomb and Morris have *completely* misrepresented the Ross and Rezak paper. It seems they quoted to the effect that there was *no* evidence of overthrusting, even though that paper appears to forcefully say the *exact* opposite! Now it's fine if creationists want to disagree with certain conclusions if they can back it up with evidence, but why in hell quote from a paper that completely contradicts your view? ... [2] Whitcomb, John C., and Henry M. Morris. _Genesis Flood_. Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.: Philadelphia, PA, 1961. [3] Ross, C. P., and Richard Rezak. "The Rocks and Fossils of Glacier National Monument". _U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper_ 294-K (1959). [I have checked these -- Max] ==! ==* SCICRE_LIE GISH SALADIN From: lippard@rvax.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) ... By the way, it is of interest to compare the debate summaries published in _Acts and Facts_ to the debate summaries published elsewhere. What follows are the summaries of the May 10, 1988 debate between Gish and Ken Saladin which took place at Auburn University which were published, respectively, in the August 1988 issue of _Acts and Facts_ and in the November/December 1988 issue of the _Creation/Evolution Newsletter_. (A transcript of the entire debate is available for $10 from the National Center for Science Education, P.O. Box 9477, Berkeley, CA 94709-0477. The transcript clearly shows that Gish was trounced.) _Acts and Facts_, August 1988, pp. 2, 4: AUBURN UNIVERSITY DEBATE Dr. Duane Gish's opponent for the debate on the campus of Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, on the evening of May 10, was Dr. Kenneth Saladin, Professor of Biology at Georgia College, Milledgeville, Georgia. The moderator was Dr. Cathy Hennen, Director of Debate and Assistant Professor of Speech and Communication at Auburn University. The debate was jointly sponsored by the Horizons Committee and the Religious Affairs Committee of the Auburn University Program Council. Each debater had 45 minutes for his initial arguments, followed by 15-minute and 5-minute rebuttals. Almost all of the 800 seats in the auditorium were filled. Saladin, who was the first speaker, listed seven criteria of science, and declared that creation theory failed to meet these criteria. He stated that belief in a deity is unscientific because it is non-falsifiable. He then listed about ten items he claimed were taught in the Bible. He outlined a series of transitions involved in the origin of life, and claimed that much of this has already been demonstrated by evolutionists. He made a caricature of the creationist explanation for the distribution of fossils in sedimentary strata, projecting a slide showing trees walking uphill. He showed a slide which portrayed a series of mammal-like reptiles with no gaps in the series, claiming this proved that reptiles had evolved into mammals. In his initial argument, Gish began by asserting that the subject of the debate was *how* the universe and the living things on earth had come into existence (not *when*). He defined the general theory of evolution, quoting Julian Huxley, and the general theory of creation. Based on these definitions, he then presented the scientific evidence from thermodynamics, probability, and the fossil record. Using a series of slides, he illustrated the metamorphosis of the Monarch butterfly, and challenged Saladin to explain how this process could have evolved by any process of evolution. In his rebuttal, Saladin claimed that the formation of snowflakes and crystals proves that the Second Law of Thermodynamics is no barrier to evolution. He argued that Dr. Charles Oxnard did not deny that australopithecines were intermediate between apes and humans. In his rebuttal, Gish, displaying a photocopy of the article from which Saladin had obtained his illustration of the series of mammal-like reptiles, pointed out that two of the creatures were totally hypothetical, others had hypothetical structures drawn on them, they were not arranged in a true time sequence, and they were not drawn to scale. In refuting Saladin's claim that success had been accomplished in origin-of-life experiments, Gish quoted from an article by John Keosian, an evolutionist who has been working in this field for 30 years, in which he asserted that claims of origin-of-life evolutionists are simply unreal, and that experiments in this field are either irrelevant or lead to a dead end. He pointed out that the formation of snowflakes has no relevance to evolution, since the processes involved go in exactly the opposite direction to that required for the origin of life. _Creation/Evolution Newsletter_, November/December 1988, pp. 11, 14: THE DEBATE CIRCUIT Saladin-Gish Debate July 10, 1988 at Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama Reported by Kenneth S. Saladin Georgia College, Milledgeville, GA 31060 My second debate with Duane Gish took place before an audience of about 800 last spring at Auburn University. It differed only in detail from out 1984 debate (see C/E N 4(4):11-12), and Gish was utterly predictable. In my 45-minute opening, I discussed the philosophy of science and contrasting attributes of creationism, age of the cosmos, origin of life, fossil stratigraphy, transitional fossils, and evidentiary examples from embryology and atavisms. I finished with a stern critique of creationist credibility, with slides and quoted passages on Gish's fire-breathing dinosaurs, Morris' non-living plants, a _Creation Research Society Quarterly_ article on the theology of radioactivity, Gish's misquotation of authority, and creationist "arkeology." My fundamental format and technique were similar to 1984. I change slides about every 40 seconds, but keep my graphics simple. Many were no more than a color photograph of a grizzly bear or a solar flare, for example--something attractive to keep the audience alert and form a visual association with an organism or concept under discussion. I used one of my students as a projectionist so he could change slides at the appropriate moments without my calling for them. In 1984 some audience members commented that this created a notably smooth and effective presentation (one was "almost mystified" at how appropriate pictures kept coming up without my saying anything). My principal improvement in 1988 was probably in speaking style. I was more experienced and comfortable before a large audience and, I felt, gave a smoother presentation. One new tactic I introduced to this debate was to gig Gish with tape recordings of his statements in previous debates. When the NCSE met in Los Angeles in 1985, Fred Edwords debated Gish on a KABC radio talk show. A caller asked Gish about the quest for Noah's ark, and while Gish denied that any evidence of the ark had been found, he also denied that the ICR sponsors expeditions to look for it. The next evening Karl Fezer and I visited the ICR and were entrusted by a secretary to roam their creationist museum after hours alone. (She asked us to lock up the ICR when we left! See our report of this foray in C/E N 5(3):16-17.) We listened to a sound-slide program on Noah's ark which proudly affirmed that the ICR *does* sponsor these expeditions. In 1986, Gish debated David Schwimmer at the University of Georgia, and in the Q/A period I confronted Gish with this contradiction. He sarcastically accused me of fabricating it and again denied ICR involvement. So I entered our debate this year prepared to repay him for his sarcasm, armed with a microcassette onto which I had dubbed the seminal portions of the Gish-Edwords and Gish-Schwimmer debates. I played Gish's twofold denial over the PA system, then showed slides of several _Acts & Facts_ accounts of these expeditions, culminating with an unequivocal affirmation of sponsorship in the November 1986 issue. In his rebuttal, Gish seemed a bit flustered and claimed he couldn't hear the tape I played, but notwithstanding the slides I had just shown, he stood up and denied sponsorship once again. Auburn is a university with a conspicuous contingent of faculty creationists, but perhaps because of statements like this, Gish seemed to enjoy little credibility or support that evening. I was told several of his supporters got up and walked out during his presentation, and with statements like this it was little wonder why. Another element in my presentation was to reveal, more assiduously than before, Gish's misquotations of the scientific literature. Knowing that Gish rests much of his case on "plausible deniability," I came armed with a veritable library of books and periodicals he commonly cites. Gish cites Romer (_Vertebrate Paleontology_, p. 338) to the effect that bats appear fully developed in the middle Eocene with no trace of ancestry. I held up Romer's book and read from an earlier chapter (p. 212), where he says that, while bats appear fully developed *by* the middle Eocene, in the *early* Eocene and the Paleocene they are virtually impossible to differentiate from their insectivore ancestors. I also attacked Gish's misrepresentation of Gavin de Beer (_Homology: An Unsolved Problem_). I had this paper with me in the original as well, and read passages diametrically opposed from what Gish avows that de Beer wrote. My concluding slide was the cover cartoon from _Creation/Evolution_ No. XI. Gish gave his usual fossilized opening statement, but he and his audience partisans struck me as surprisingly subdued compared to other debates of his that I've attended. He discussed the Big Bang and Cosmic Chicken, the hydrogen-to-humans scenario, thermodynamics, the Hoyle- Wickramasinghe statistical argument, fossil transitions, human origins, and the Oxnard-Zuckerman argument. There were only two new features of his presentation: he dwelt at length on the supposed inexplicability of metamorphosis in the monarch butterfly, and he gave a juvenile gloss on Michael Denton's _Evolution: A Theory in Crisis_. Apaprently he never read any further than the flap of the dust jacket, and he reminded me of a fifth-grade student trying to fake a report on a book he'd never read. In 1984, I worked frantically during the intermission to prepare my first rebuttal. This year, I had prepared a rebuttal in advance from Gish's 1984 statement, and a card file to cover anything new. Gish was so true to form I had no need to prepare during the intermission, so while he prepared his notes I went down and mingled with the audience, distributed NCSE literature, and basked in audience adulation. Rebuttals were quite straightforward, and I especially enjoyed taking apart the Hoyle-Wickramasinghe argument. For this I used a substantive critique of the fallacies in their statistical assumptions, as well as a damaging overview of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe's *other* biological beliefs: insects smarter than humans and not letting on, flu epidemics from outer space, and Wickramasinghe's trial testimony that Gish's views on evolution are "claptrap" and could not be supported by any rational scientist. In the question/answer period the audience was surprisingly hostile toward Gish. Questions put to me were no more challenging than "Do you think evolution can be harmonized with belief in God?" and "What if they *did* find Noah's ark?" The only one for which I had no ready answer is why organisms now use only the L-isomer of amino acids. Gish was piqued when the first questioner, Georgia State University biologist Fred Parrish, addressed him as *Reverend* Gish and questioned his integrity as a Christian. Others attacked his statistic "proof" of the impossibility of things which in fact do happen, his abuse of thermodynamics, and his reliance on popularized rather than refereed scientific literature. In contrast to the 1984 audience, who came in yellow buses and thumped bibles on their knees, this audience impressed me as relatively savvy. To anticipate and defuse the secular humanist attack, my closing statement focused on anticreationist opinion of clerics ranging from John Paul II to Baptist and Episcopal leaders in Georgia. I described and displayed the compilation in which the Franciscan physician Ed Friedlander has photocopied statements from Gish's literature alongside photocopies of the sources cited by Gish to demonstrate Gish's habit of distortion. Gish had the last word and retorted, "Sure there's a lot of liberal theologians on the side of evolution. Why wouldn't they be? All these liberal theologians are for ordaining homosexual ministers, for legalized abortion.... Of *course* they're for evolution!" The debate format did not allow me an opportunity to come back and ask if he had meant to include John Paul II among these "liberal theologians." Following the debate I was surrounded by well-wishers and chagrined creationist students. They were especially interested in comparing Gish's writing with the Romer and de Beer literature, and seeing Ed Friedlander's paper, which some people subsequently requested from me by mail. The creationists at my table seemed as disappointed in Gish's performance as Democrats reviewing the last Bush-Dukakis debate. The student organizer seemed almost grudgingly to present me with the check for my expenses and honorarium. He had written to me in advance, "We will do our best to publicize to supporters of both sides. However, it must be realized that Auburn is a small town in the Deep South [and will probably have] a bias toward Dr. Gish's theory." As it turned out, I had no complaints about this audience, but I think Gish and the organizers were a bit chagrined by it. The debate is recorded on a videotape of so-so quality, a pair of good 90-minute cassettes, and a verbatim transcript of 90+ pages. The transcript includes post-debate annotations and research into Gish's literature citations. I will send a four-page, detailed outline of the debate (the table of contents of the transcript) free to anyone who requests it, but I regrettably do not have the time to honor individual requests for copies of the tapes or entire transcript. I expect to have these available for distribution through the NCSE by January, and presumably their availability and price will be announced in this newsletter. I wish to express my appreciation to Auburn University philosophy professor Delos McKown, who was originally invited to confront Gish and recommended me in his stead; and to my students who helped with literature distribution and recording the debate. If I can extend any wishes to Dr. Gish, they are for good health and a long life, so my colleagues and I will have many more opportunities to publicly reveal the mendacity of America's most capable exponent of "scientific" creationism. ==! ==* SCICRE_LIE MISQUOTE MORRIS Here's an example of creationist misquoting, from Henry Morris' book, _Science, Scripture, and the Young Earth_, p. 12: The catfish range in length from 11 to 24 cm., with a mean of 18 cm. Preservation is excellent. In some specimens, even the skin and other soft parts, including the adipose fin, are well preserved ... ... strongly suggests that the catfish could have been transported to their site of fossilization.(19) Note 19 refers to an article in the journal _Geology_ by Buccheim and Surdam, which says: The abundant and widespread occurrence of skeletons of bottom feeders, some with soft fleshy skin intact, strongly suggests that the catfish were a resident population. It is highly improbable that the catfish could have been transported to their site of fossilization. Experiments and observations made on various species of fish have shown that fish decompose and disarticulate after only very short distances of transport (Shafer, 1972). Karl Fezer discovered this, and wrote a critique, which he sent to Morris for comment. This resulted in the following "correction" in _Acts & Facts_ (vol. 12, no. 11, p. 6): CORRECTION Readers who may have purchased the booklet, _Science, Scripture, and the Young Earth_, announced in the August issue of _Acts & Facts_, should make the following correction: on page 12, delete lines 18 and 19. A section which was inadvertently omitted in this quotation (from an article in _Geology_ by Buccheim and Surdam) inverts the authors' intended meaning. However, the argument being advanced in this section by the booklet's author, Dr. Henry Morris, is not affected by this correction. ICR writers always try diligently to quote accurately and in context, knowing that evolutionists are carefully watching their writings to ferret out any examples of misquoting which may occur, but this one got by. If the authors of the quoted paper were embarrassed in any way by our lapse in this case, we apologize. ==! ==* SCICRE_LIE GISH PROTEINS BULLFROG CHICKEN LUCY ... Gish has been caught on numerous occasions spouting lies, yet he never offers retractions and his own religion tells him that he should be honest. One example is Gish's "bullfrog proteins." In 1983, in a PBS show on creationism, Gish claimed that while humans and chimpanzees have many proteins which are identical or differ by only a few amino acids, there are also human proteins which are more similar to a bullfrog or a chicken than to chimpanzees. Gish was repeatedly pressed to produce his evidence. Two years later, Philip Kitcher challenged Gish to produce his evidence or retract his claim in a debate at the University of Minnesota. Gish refused to respond. Kevin Wirth of Students for Origins Research (a pro-creationist organization) begged Gish to respond in the pages of _Origins Research_ regarding the claim. He refused. (See Robert Schadewald, "Scientific Creationism and Error," Creation/Evolution XVII (vol. 6, no. 1, 1986).) Another example involving numerous creationists is the claim that Donald Johanson discovered "Lucy's" knee joint 2 km away from the rest of the skeleton. This claim was first made in the _Bible-Science Newsletter_ by Tom Willis in 1987, and has since been repeated by Walter Brown, John Morris, Paul Taylor, Russell Arndts, and Michael Girouard. But it's false, apparently based on a misunderstanding at a Q&A session at the University of Missouri attended by Willis. Johanson *did* find a knee joint 2 km away from "Lucy," but he never claimed that this knee joint was "Lucy"'s. I gave a copy of a letter from Johanson describing the facts of the matter to Girouard in person at an ICR seminar, and he claimed he would read it carefully and respond to any letters I wrote him. I wrote him in December of 1989 and never received a reply. Brown was also informed of the facts of the matter, in both the pages of _Creation/Evolution_ and of _Origins Research_. In both cases he responded with new claims about "Lucy" which had nothing to do with the knee joint--he just ignored the issue at hand. (_Origins Research_ didn't print my followup.) My letter to Tom Willis received no reply. My letter to the _Bible-Science Newsletter_ (in response to Arndts' more recent repetition of the false claim) went unpublished and I received no reply... ... ==! ==* SCICRE_LIE MISQUOTE CLARK DOUBT Recently there has been a claim (by Jim Loucks) that evolution writers misquote creationists much more often than the reverse. Jim of course has so far failed to substantiate that claim with any evidence, while in the mean time there have been several articles posted documenting creationist misquoting of evolutionary authors (for example the Eldredge and Gould case). Below is yet another example of creationist misquoting due to not checking sources. It seems that a common tactic is to scan "friendly" papers for quotes from "hostile" authors which contain quotes that appear to support your position ([sarcasm on] certainly another creationist would never misrepresent another author right? [sarcasm off]). The article in this case is titled _Some_Philosophical_Implications_of_the_ _Theory_of_Evolution_ from the Seventh-Day Adventist publication _Origins_ Vol. 3, 1976, page 39. The author is John D. Clark. Mr. Roy should take notice of this one (I believe that John Clark is the son of an Adventist biologist who has written several books on creationism that are used in Adventist schools). This paper gives an excellent example of how creationists love to quote each other in a round-robin fashion without ever checking their sources. Let me quote from John Clark a section that includes a quote from Charles Darwin's autobiography. Charles Darwin in his autobiography understood evolution's serious implications for man. This understanding took the form of the "horrid doubt". He states: "But then arises the doubt, can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animal, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions? [The grand conclusion in this context is the evolutionary hypothesis itself]." At the basis of this evolutionary idea was the theory of natural selection... I would like to point out that the editorial comment in the square brackets about the grand conclusion was put there by John Clark but in the same type and density and inside the quote attributed to Darwin. Now I have read Darwin's autobiography, and I didn't remember any references to "horrid doubts" (which Clark refers to in quotes at least 4 times in his paper) or even significant doubts about the "evolutionary hypothesis" as Clark calls it. Since I have his autobiography, I decided to look up the quote, so I turned to the reference provided by Clark to help me find it faster. Much to my surprise, the footnote did not refer to Darwin's autobiography, rather the quote was taken from the Frontispiece to David Lack, 1961 _Evolutionary_Theory_and_Christian_Belief:_the_unresolved_Conflict_. Since I did not have this book it appeared that I would have to search my copy of Darwin's autobiography to find the quote, which I did. Within about 1/2 hour I was able to find it (there were no references for "doubts" or "horrid doubts" in the index). The quote is contained in a chapter entitled "Religious Belief" and had no mention of "horrid doubts" of any kind. Furthermore, this quote is found at the end of a long discussion where he states his inability to believe in the Bible or even the God of the Bible; however he did find reason to believe in some sort of a diety. Let me quote with some real context: When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of a man; and I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the Origin of Species; and it is since that time that it has very gradually with many fluctuations become weaker. But then arises the doubt--can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animal, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions? May not these be the result of the connection between cause and effect which strikes us as a necessary one, but probably depends merely on inherited experience? Nor must we overlook the probability of the constant inculcation in a belief in God on the minds of children producing so strong and perhaps an inherited effect on their brains not yet fully developed, that it would be as difficult for them to throw off their belief in God, as for a monkey to throw off its instinctive fear and hatred of a snake. Nowhere is there a reference to a "horrid doubt", but more importantly, the doubt he is referring to is not about the evolutionary hypothesis, rather he is affirming his belief in evolution while expressing doubt regarding the reliability of humanity's tendency to believe in a god. His doubt is that our tendency to believe in God is suspect, and even a vague belief in a deity may be too much. On the next page he says "...and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic." (I don't want to start a thread on Agnosticism and Atheism, that's not the point. The point is the use of Darwin's words in a creationist paper.) If you want to look it up, be sure to get a recent edition (i.e. > 1960). Cheers, Dan Ford -------- -- Seth J. Bradley Internet: sbradley@scic.intel.com UUCP: uunet!scic.intel.com!sbradley ---------------------------------------- "A system admin's life is a sorry one. The only advantage he has over Emergency Room doctors is that malpractice suits are rare. On the other hand, ER doctors never have to deal with patients installing new versions of their own innards!" -Michael O'Brien ==! ==* ICR VISIT Article 30823 of talk.origins: From: slinke@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Steven Linke) Subject: I visited the ICR in person (1 of 4) Message-ID: <37430@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> Date: 29 Aug 92 09:09:07 GMT Followup-To: sci.skeptic Lines: 156 I visited the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) on August 27th. This institute seems to be a common topic of debate on these groups, so since I live relatively nearby and have had an interest in the discussions, I decided to pay them a visit. In addition, I was seeking original creationist papers on molecular biology (I never found any). I hope this information isn't redundant or included in the FAQs. I found it to be quite interesting. The ICR is located in Santee, CA, a suburb on the far eastern edge of San Diego (about 20 miles from the coast and my residence in La Jolla near the University of California - San Diego campus): Institute for Creation Research 10946 Woodside Avenue North Santee, CA 92071 (619) 448-0900 It is a relatively new (built in 1985) and attractive two-story building located in an industrial park off a frontage road of highway 67. It is located between Westmark General Contractors and a rather ugly dirt field serving as home to the Santee Swap Meet. There were about 20 spaces in the parking lot. Much of the first floor is devoted to the "ICR Museum of Creation and Earth History." In general, the museum is visually quite impressive. They are calling it "San Diego's NEWEST Museum" and are having a Grand Opening Celebration September 18-20. A pamphlet reads: "Free guided tours! See live animals and learn about their Creator! View exhibits and videos that present the case for creation and the evidence against evolution! Enjoy Free refreshments! Special Thanks to K-PRAISE 1210 AM Radio!" The pamphlet also states: "`Home schoolers' especially invited Friday--Meet Dr. Richard Bliss, designer of the `Good Science' curriculum for home and Christian schools." The agenda of events for the Grand Opening include 25-minute guided tours, 20-minute live animal presentations, 20 minutes of science experiments conducted by Dr. Richard Bliss, book signings (by Dr. Henry Morris, Dr. John Morris, Dr. Duane Gish, Dr. Richard Bliss, Ken Ham, and others), a "Media Tour," a video called "The Great Dinosaur Mystery," and a live broadcast by K- PRAISE 1210 AM on September 18th from 4-6 PM. In reference to the live broadcast the pamphlet says: "`The Grapevine' radio program with Michael Law will be broadcasting live on the Museum Patio in front of the ICR Museum. Come with your questions (or phone in with a question at 1 (800) 281-1210). Guests: Dr. Duane Gish and Ken Ham of ICR." After receiving a copy of the museum pamphlet and the newest copy of the "ICR Graduate School" catalog (1990-1991), I proceeded through the museum. (By the way, the curator of the museum was listening to Rush Limbaugh at the front desk.) I thought the museum was relatively busy (for a Thursday afternoon). Several parents brought their children through the museum to show them creationism. In fact, the ICR Graduate School Catalog states: "The Museum of Creation and Earth History is open to the public and is frequently toured by visiting classes of school children, as well as individuals." I felt this post would be of interest to relay what the ICR is showing, in their simplified layman terms, to the general public who might come to visit the museum. The exhibits started (appropriately) with the first day of creation and continued forward in creationist time. I will describe the exhibits that I perceive to be the most hotly contested topics, but not near all of them. I spent about two hours going through and scribbling down quotations from the various exhibits, but certainly can't cover everything. There were Impact articles (ICR publications) available at various locations pertaining to the subject matter of the exhibits. I have split the museum up into ten different exhibits: EXHIBIT #1: SCIENCE AND FAITH ============================= Various wall plaques. A few read: Science and Religion -------------------- "Religion and science are not separate spheres of study, as some say. Both involve the real world of human life and observation. If both are true, they must agree. "In fact, true science supports the Biblical worldview. There are many facts of science revealed in the Bible and no proven scientific errors. "However, science does not support false religions (e.g. atheism, evolutionism, pantheism, humanism, etc.)" Importance of the Origins Issue ------------------------------- "...The tree of evolutionism bears only corrupt fruits; Creationism bears good fruits...It is vitally important that we and our children believe and obey the Biblical teachings on Creation." [This is a repeated theme in the museum.] The plaque then goes on to quote the National Science Foundation's resolution on the freedom of scientific inquiry, followed by their comment: "With remarkable inconsistency, however, the National Academy opposes the teaching of scientific creation!" [This, also, is a repeated theme.] Creationist Religions --------------------- The plaque states that there are only three "real" creationist religions: 1. Orthodox Judaism 2. Orthodox Islam 3. Biblical Christianity It adds: "`Liberal' branches accept `theistic evolution.'" Evolutionary Religions ---------------------- Examples listed: "Atheism, Humanism, New Age-ism, Occultism, Liberalism, Marxism, Fascism." [The fact that these are "evolutionary religions" is yet another repeated theme of the museum.] EXHIBIT #2: SEVEN DAYS OF CREATION ================================== This exhibit, among many other things, answers the question, "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" The answer is the "chicken," of course! Just read Genesis 1:11-12. :-) For the first days of creation (heaven, earth, etc.), the exhibit features impressive pictures of the planets and stars with dramatic lighting and backgrounds. For the creation of animals, they actually have several small live animals in cages behind glass windows. These include a bird, some fish, a tarantella, a cricket, a lizard, a rat, and a snake. There were also some empty cages. Overall, the live animal exhibits were pretty pathetic, especially the "cricket exhibit" and the empty cages. Creation of Functional Maturity ------------------------------- This plaque described how fruit trees were created mature and able to produce fruit (so they presumably already contained rings), and how Adam was created as a full-grown man. It concludes that, "...If one denies the true revealed history of the world, and attempts to date the object or the world, this functional maturity could be mistaken for age." EXHIBIT #3: THE FALL OF MAN =========================== Nothing I found interesting, except that supposedly no animals died until Adam sinned by eating the apple. The first animals to die were those used to make skins to cover Adam and Eve's nakedness. -- Steve Linke Salk Institute (Gene Expression Lab) La Jolla, CA Article 30825 of talk.origins: Xref: cse.uta.edu sci.skeptic:30027 talk.origins:30825 From: slinke@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Steven Linke) Subject: I visited the ICR in person (2 of 4) Message-ID: <37431@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> Date: 29 Aug 92 09:16:01 GMT Followup-To: sci.skeptic Lines: 149 EXHIBIT #4: 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS ===================================== Displayed in a glass case were several "decaying" items, including: a big rusty hook, a melted Erlenmeyer flask, a mouse skeleton, and a melted 45 rpm record ("Bad Luck" by Dale & Grace). Presumably, they show the increasing entropy of the universe. Putting that Dale & Grace record out of its misery by holding it over an open flame is one of the better things the ICR has probably done. :-) Another display reads: "The universal Second Law is the scientific reflection of God's curse on His created world because of sin. There is no known exception. All processes (whether operating on open or closed systems) tend to go in the direction of increasing entropy (or `disorder'). This tendency can be reversed only by the application of outside, specially programmed, energy or information. This tendency directly precludes any natural evolution toward higher order. "Entropy normally increases more rapidly in systems open to influx of external energy." At this point, there appeared a very simplistic drawing of the sun radiating energy to the earth in the form of a hug by cute, little yellow arms. "Conditions for Increasing Complexity in Open System: 1. Open System 2. Available Energy Note: These two conditions are satisfied by all systems on earth. Therefore, though `necessary,' they are not `sufficient' conditions. 3. Program (to `direct' the growth of complexity) Examples: A. `Genetic Code' in DNA of living systems. B. `Plans and specification' for construction of artificial system. 4. Mechanism for storing and converting incoming energy. Examples: A. Photosynthesis in plants B. Metabolism in animals C. Machinery in artificial construction" EXHIBIT #5: NOAH'S ARK ====================== You walk into a room with the "look" and "feel" of Noah's Ark. One wall contains a perspective picture of the Ark which makes the room look like it continues on into rows of animal cages. There are recorded sounds of thunder and rain and flashes of light to simulate lightning. Several plaques describe the purported sightings of Noah's Ark on Mt. Ararat. They mention several expeditions to find the Ark, and the sketches and photos that were supposedly made. Of course, all the photos have been lost for various reasons or are being hidden by scientists (such as at the Smithsonian Institution). No real photos or sketches are in the museum. There is also a "scale model" of the Ark and an explanation of how all the animals fit onto it. The following points were made to show which kinds were on the Ark: 1. "Noah was told to take two of each `kind' (seven of every `clean' kind). 2. "Biblical kind uncertain--probably linked by genetic variation. 3. "Example: dog kind probably includes dogs, wolves, coyotes, etc. 4. "`Kind' certainly not more narrow than biological `species.'" The number of "kinds" on board the Ark according to the creationists: 3,700 mammals; 8,600 birds; 6,300 reptiles; and 2,500 amphibians. Animals not on board: fishes, tunicates, echinoderms, arthropods, mollusks, worms, coelenterates, sponges, and protozoans. This is 21,100 total "kinds." From this, the absolute maximum number of animals that had to be on the Ark was 50,000 ("and probably much less"). The dimensions of the Ark were listed at 450'x75'x45'. This, the plaque proclaims, results in 1,518,750 cubic feet, which is apparently the equivalent of 569 railroad stock cars. And, of course, one can fit 240 sheep in a railroad stock car. The logical conclusion here, according to the plaque, is that the 50,000 animals could have fit into only 208 stock cars (50,000/240). So, the animals only took up 36.5% of the Ark. How did the animals survive together without eating each other? Simple, according to another plaque: "1. In face of danger, predators and prey mingle together and tend to enter a torpid (death-like) state." 2. Under stress, animals go into a state of hibernation or estivation. 3. God could have instituted a state of hibernation, estivation, or relative dormancy in the animals He sent to the Ark, so that the need for animal husbandry would be minimized. Survivors may then have passed on these abilities to their descendants." EXHIBIT #6: GEOLOGY =================== This exhibit consists mainly of fossils in display cases. They may be real, or they may be fake. The walls are a mock up of geological strata, and there is a wall-sized picture of the Grand Canyon. There is also a small separate Mt. St. Helens room in the shape of a volcano with painted lava running down the side. The main point is seemingly that the pictures show very thin strata that apparently formed during the relatively recent eruption. It also contains pictures of upright logs in Spirit Lake. How to Determine the Geological "Age" of a Fossil ------------------------------------------------- "1. DO NOT use the depth where it is found. 2. DO NOT use the type of rock in which it is found. 3. DO NOT use radiometric date (these are practical only in non- fossil-bearing igneous rocks, and often disagree with each other). 4. DO NOT use the `stage of evolution' of the fossil (that would be circular reasoning). 5. DO use the Word of God (The Bible indicates that most of the fossils must have been buried in one year--the year of the Flood)!" The Unreliability of Radiometric Dating --------------------------------------- "1. If God created a `very good,' functionally mature earth, it would already have possessed an array of isotopes and elements, including their `daughter' products. 2. During the Biblical Flood especially, but even under normal circumstances, rocks would have been subjected to alteration by ground water, etc., thereby changing their isotope content. 3. Although decay rates of major isotopes are today rather stable, it may be that they have changed over time, particularly during times of major environmental changes (e.g. the Curse, the Flood). 4. It is known that many--probably most--radioactive age measurements give discordant or anomalous, and therefore invalid, ages. 5. The method assumes that the Earth is at least old enough to have produced the daughter amount through radio active decay. "Thus we see that radiometric schemes assume the concept of uniformity and deny the Biblical doctrines of Creation, Fall, Flood, and Young Earth. Little wonder the results of these methods commonly disagree with each other and with other geological and historical evidence." -- Steve Linke Salk Institute (Gene Expression Lab) La Jolla, CA Article 30824 of talk.origins: From: slinke@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Steven Linke) Subject: I visited the ICR in person (3 of 4) Message-ID: <37432@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> Date: 29 Aug 92 09:18:29 GMT Followup-To: sci.skeptic Lines: 160 EXHIBIT #7: THE ICE AGE ============================== This room has blue, contoured walls that look somewhat like a glacier. There are large sculptured icicles hanging from the ceiling. An air conditioner blowing down from the ceiling gives the physical feeling of cold as you walk through and read the seven plaques about the creationist post-Flood Ice Age. The first four plaques discuss the causes of the ice age, the Bible's discussion of the Ice Age, high volcanism during and after the Ice Age, and the fact that there was only ONE Ice Age (not multiple ones), respectively. Human and Animal Migration (Plaque 5) ------------------------------------- "During the `Ice Age,' so much water was frozen that sea level was lowered several hundred feet. Ice shelves covered much of the oceans poleward of 45 degrees. This made all the continents accessible, thus allowing migration to occur...Human migration was enforced by the confusion of languages at Babel. The `Table of Nations' in Genesis 10 informs us of the basic migration patterns." At this point, a mother with her small child walked into the room, and as I copied down the above quote, I listened to her describe to her daughter how the oceans dried up allowing kangaroos to get to Australia, and how ice covered the oceans allowing all the animals to get to America. Environmental Effects (Plaque 6) -------------------------------- "The continual snowfall and frequent volcanism, each on a scale far beyond anything in recent history, would leave records difficult to understand today. Since the seasons would not be as regular and predictable as today: Would trees only add one tree ring per year? [picture of cross-section of tree trunk showing rings] Would thick build-ups of ice show a pattern similar to but of different origin than the summer/winter patterns of today? [picture of ice cores] Would the lack of equality in the production and decay rates of Carbon-14 cause problems in dating? All are areas of current research at ICR, and are of primary importance in deciphering the past." Effect on Human Life (Plaque 7) ------------------------------- "Weaker, smaller, less technologically capable groups would probably reside in caves, use stone tools, and live a `hunter/gatherer' type of lifestyle." EXHIBIT #8: POST ICE-AGE CIVILIZATION ===================================== This room had a very "Egyptian" look to it. In the center is a two-foot model of the Tower of Babel encased in glass. Track lighting in the ceiling illuminated the many wall plaques with various colors of light. There were several skulls of numerous evolutionary ancestors of humans, although they are dismissed as apes or modern humans in the museum. I don't know if they are real or just mock-ups. For each of the species, the plaques contain the "Evolutionist Interpretation" and the "Creationist Interpretation." Here are some of the Creationist interpretations: Homo Erectus ------------ Probably true humans. Some may be extinct apes. Along with Neanderthal and Archaic Homo sapiens, they probably represent post-Flood ethnic and/or language groups, demonstrating man's diversity. Australopithecines ------------------ "An extinct ape not ancestral to humans." Neanderthals ------------ Short, thick, muscular individuals not unlike cold-adapted modern man such as Eskimos (consistent with the Ice Age theory following the Flood and the Tower of Babel). "Many Neanderthal features are similar to those in elderly humans today. Since humans lived to great ages in the initial generations after the Flood and Babel, perhaps the features are primarily due to advanced age...They were true human beings, descendants of Adam and Noah." Archaic Homo Sapiens -------------------- True humans of post-Flood era. Cave Man -------- Weaker, degenerate descendants of those migrating away from Babel. Laetoli Footprints ------------------ A mock-up of the Laetoli footprints were displayed as an evolutionary effort to make the data fit their "preconceived theory." The Rosetta Stone ----------------- A mock-up of the Rosetta Stone was also in the room. The plaque next to it read: "Rosetta stone from near Rashid (Rosetta), Delta Egypt; 196 B.C....This inscribed stone slab was discovered in 1799 by..." Nowhere did the plaque indicate that this wasn't the ACTUAL stone. In fact, from the language it seemed that I was standing before the real thing. The museum had become quite busy, and as I wrote the above quote some people walked by and marveled that the ICR museum had this artifact. I was amused, but broke their hearts when I tapped on the hollow cardboard "stone" and indicated that it was just a photograph. Origin of Races --------------- "The separate language groups no longer could intermarry freely with the rest of mankind. As in-breeding and lack of access to the larger pool of genes occurred, ethnic characteristics developed. Furthermore, each local environment tended to favor selection of certain traits, and eliminate the others. Ethnic characteristics, such as skin color, arose from loss of genetic variability, not from origin of new genes through mutation as suggested by evolution. "THE CONCEPT OF RACE IS AN EVOLUTIONARY IDEA. Scripture teaches that `God has made of one blood all nations,' Acts 17:26. All humans possess the same color, just different amounts of it. We are all descendant from Adam and Noah." Dinosaurs and Dragons --------------------- "Dinosaurs lived before the Flood, and most dinosaur fossils are remains of those buried in flood sediments...Representatives of the land `kinds' must have been present on the Ark, and lived for some time after the Flood." There were many small ancient artifacts such as daggers, oil lamps, etc. in display cases. I don't know if they were legitimate. The museum seemed to praise archaeology. One exhibit quoted an archaeologist as follows: Accuracy of Biblical Records ---------------------------- "`No archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible' (Nelson Glueck, Dean of Palestinian Archaeologists [not a Christian] in his book Rivers in the Desert)." -- Steve Linke Salk Institute (Gene Expression Lab) La Jolla, CA Article 30826 of talk.origins: From: slinke@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (Steven Linke) Subject: I visited the ICR in person (4 of 4) Message-ID: <37434@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> Date: 29 Aug 92 09:20:32 GMT Followup-To: sci.skeptic Lines: 122 EXHIBIT #9: ORIGIN OF RELIGION ============================== The origins of various religions in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Americas, Greece, etc. were described with a creationist slant, including: Evolutionary Pantheism ---------------------- "Evolutionism--that is, the denial of a transcendent personal God as Creator of all things--can be traced back to ancient Sumeria, which probably means to Nimrod...This system of pantheism ("all- god") became equivalent to polytheism ("many gods"), involving astrology, spiritism, and idolatry. Atheistic evolution soon followed, and dominates much of American academia today..." EXHIBIT #10: FAMOUS CREATIONISTS AND EVOLUTIONISTS ================================================== This final exhibit was a hallway consisting of many pictures of famous people who, at some point in their lives, supposedly made comments about evolution and/or Christianity. For example, some of the famous scientists and philosophers in the creationist hall of fame are: Boyle, Newton, Pascal, DesCartes, Linnaeus, Faraday, Babbage, Morse, Rawlinson, Pasteur, Kelvin, Maxwell, and (not a person but) the Declaration of Independence. Evolutionists in the hall of shame included: Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Freud, and these (with museum quotes): William Sumner: "His Darwinist views contradicted many basic American ideals." John Rockefeller: "A ruthless developer of one of America's largest oil empires, Rockefeller was a staunch theistic evolutionist." Andrew Carnegie: "Carnegie is honored today for philanthropies and devotion to culture, but he was cruel and heartless in his own day to competitors and laborers alike. Regarding evolution he said: `I remember that light came in as a flood and all was clear. Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural but I had found the truth of evolution.'" Friedrich Nietzche: "He was strongly influenced by Darwin's theory, especially its racist implications." Karl Marx: "...he wanted to dedicate his book DAS KAPITAL to Charles Darwin, who had given him what he thought was the scientific foundation for Communism." At this point, one of the museum patrons commented on the picture of Karl Marx, "Evolutionism is practically synonymous with Communism." To which his wife responded, "This museum is a good place to send school children to get good information." Alfred Wallace: "According to his own testimony, he was given the whole theory of natural selection in two hours of a malarial `fit' in the jungle--the same theory, in detail, that Darwin had been trying to develop for 20 years in the world's chief center of scientific learning." There were also the names of about ten other scientists from whom Darwin purportedly "stole" his theory of evolution. Near the end of the hall of pictures were two plaques titled: Nazism and Communism--Fruits of Evolution and Racism--The Fruit of Evolution The hall included a picture of an astronaut (I forget his name) who proclaims his faith in God and Creation. One woman walking by commented, "He's a creationist, and he's a rocket scientist. He's a good guy. Why do they put him in with the bad guys?" [referring to the pictures of Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Marx, etc.] Another guy remarked, "Most of the astronauts that I've heard of believe in God when they come back down." To which his friend replied, "It would be hard not to." Suddenly, another person said, "Ooooh, that evolutionist looks like Woody Allen!" The final exhibit in the creationism vs. evolution hallway is pictures of two trees (a Creationist Tree and an Evolutionary Tree). The Creationist tree has "long roots" and "good fruits." The Evolutionary tree has "short roots" and "evil fruits." Branches of the Creationist Tree -------------------------------- Genuine Christianity: Correct Practice: True Christology True Science True Evangelism True History True Missions True Government True Fellowship True Americanism True Gospel True Family Life True Faith True Education True Morality True Hope Branches of the Evolutionary Tree --------------------------------- Harmful Philosophies: Evil Practices: Communism Abortion Nazism Promiscuity Imperialism Pornography Monopolism Genocide Humanism Euthanasia Atheism Infanticide Amoralism Chauvinism Scientism Bestiality Racism Homosexuality Pantheism Drug Culture Behaviorism Child Abuse Materialism Slavery The museum exhibits end with these words: "To those who are not yet believing Christians or whose faith has been weakened by attacks of skeptics, ICR personnel would be happy to assist you in settling these vital and eternal issues. Just ask..." -- Steve Linke Salk Institute (Gene Expression Lab) La Jolla, CA ==!

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank