By: David Rice To: Rob Bamford Re: REvolution You said to Hector Plasmic: +gt;+gt;RB+gt;If

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

Skeptic Tank!

By: David Rice To: Rob Bamford Re: REvolution You said to Hector Plasmic: >>RB>If my evidence was from ICR, I don't see what the problem >>RB> would be. >HP> ROFL! How about the fact that ICR has never managed to >HP> provide any evidence for its claims? How about the fact that >HP> ICR has been caught repeatedly in lies? Do these help you see >HP> what the problem would be? RB> Could you show me one specific claim that they have made that RB> they have not given any evidence for, and also one specific lie RB> they have been caught in repeatedly. You want only one? Good grief: read some of their propaganda and you'll stumble over hundreds. Here's a few lies by the ICR cult: Gish's religious tract "Are You Being Brainwashed?" In it he claims dynosaur and human foot prints are found togeather at the Paluxy River (they aren't), and claims the precambrian is void of fossils (it isn't). Two lies by an ICR priest right there, though he has been corrected dozens of times. in Whitcomb, John C., and Henry M. Morris. _Genesis Flood_. Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co.: Philadelphia, PA, 1961 the authors claim that the Lewis Overthrust and Heart Mountain Overthrust lay flat, when in fact these formations are highly fault thrusted, with older material often laying on top of younger material. That's ICR priest lie example #3. John Morris (_Back to Genesis_, November 1989) claims that Donald Johanson found "Lucy"'s knee joint 2 km away from the rest of the bones. The claim is a lie, as may be observed in Johanson's book detailing his discoveries (_Lucy_, co-authored with Maitland Edey). That's ICR priest lie example #4. ICR priest Gary Parker, on page 95 of his _Creation: The Facts of Life_, claims: "Famous paleontologists at Harvard, the American Museum, and even the British Museum say we have _not a single_ example of evolutionary transition at all." This is untrue. A prominent creationist [Sunderland] interviewed a number of paleontologists at those institutions and elsewhere (actually, he never did get to Harvard). Some candidly admitted that there are some procedural difficulties in recognizing ancestors and that, yes, the fossil record is rather full of gaps. Nothing new there--- it's what evolutionary theory predicts. This creationist then wrote letters to various newspapers, and even testified at hearings that the paleontologists he interviewed "admitted" that there are no intermediates in the fossil record. Thus, the lie has been perpetuated by Parker. All of the paleontologists interviewed did cite examples of intermediates to the interviewer. This is reported by Niles Eldredge, in _The Monkey Business: A Scientist Looks at Creationism_ (1982, Washington Square Press, pp. 130-131), whom was one of the paleontologists Sunderland interviewed. Gary Parker lied: that's lie example #5. Richard Bliss claims to have Ed.D. from Sarasota University. This university exists in a motel room in Florida, and is not accredited--- it SELLS degrees. That's lie example #6. "On Creationism Free Inquiry, Spring 1982, volume 2, number 2, page 4." A display at the ICR cult's chaple 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." Which is of course a lie--- the sun pumps a massive amount of energy into Earth's systems. That's ICR cult lie example #7. Need I go on? RB> If your claim is true, then I could see why it wouldn't be RB> acceptable to have my evidence from ICR. Why is that? Just because the ICR has lied repeatedly and refuses to back up their claims with any evidence, does not automatically dismiss any future claims they make--- it only makes them much less worthy of consideration.

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank