Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]

Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | 08 July 2003 | MATT FRAZIER

[CobaltBlue]

Antique white is a nice neutral color that goes with pretty much any decor.

[f.Christian]

I have the radio on ... will be listening --- thanks !

[Aric2000]

You have obvioulsy IGNORED the prof's posts, where experiments have SHOWN evolution in action, IN the laboratory.

It HAS been demonstrated, it has been observed, it HAS been repeated, it HAS been Tested, and The evidence is so overwhelming that it might as well be proof.

Evolution has been, continues to be, and will continue to be science.

[js1138]

The following is from one of your sources:

In contrast, the Duke study generated 97 percent to 100 percent bootstrap support in its nuclear gene comparisons of animals representing all three mammalian groups. Mammals they studied included the platypus, echidna, opossum, wallaby, hedgehog, mouse, rat, rabbit, cow, pig, bat, tree shrew, colugo, ringtail lemur and humans.

"This is the first molecular evolutionary study that seriously and powerfully says the paleontologists have been right all along in grouping mammals the way they did," said Killian. "It turns out that common sense is correct."

[jennyp]

"What if we question his integrity?"

Sure beats anwering his questions, doesn't it prof

Hey, we're not the ones you guys need to convince to listen to Hovind! You need to convince Answers In Genesis that he's helping your cause:

Over the years, AiG has published articles about certain ideas and interpretations of evidence that had been used in creationist presentations (including our own at times) but had been found to be incorrect or in need of substantial modification. Sometimes popular arguments (as in the ‘moon dust’ example following) have had to be abandoned because new research obtained new data. In such cases, there is always the theoretical possibility that later data may reverse the situation again, but this is no excuse for continuing to use the same argument in the same way without taking note of the newly obtained facts.

Other times, it was found that a particular quote had indeed been used out of context, or proper research had not been conducted and the material should not have been used at all. As fallible human beings, we have sometimes discovered this sort of thing in our own publications. So if this could happen even with all the checks and balances in place with a large organization like AiG, how much more difficult must it be for those who do not have easy access to such a network of internal and external professional advisers. So we thought we should embark on a program to share this sort of thing publicly, so as to be a help to others.

As part of this, AiG published a particular article entitled Arguments we think creationists should NOT use, and followed this with a related Creation magazine article Moving forward—arguments we think creationists shouldn’t use. This was not aimed at any particular person or organization, but was produced as a result of the collective wisdom of AiG’s trained scientists and other professionals, based on years of research and experience.

When an attempted critique of this AiG article appeared on Kent Hovind’s Web site, AiG was somewhat surprised (and disappointed) to note that it frequently and significantly misrepresents and/or misunderstands the statements and positions made in our carefully researched document.

In the interests of maintaining Christian/creationist integrity, we believed we had to respond to Kent Hovind’s critique (albeit with a heavy heart), particularly because of the mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good.

Before responding to specifics, it may be worth pointing out the obvious: If these arguments don’t convince fellow creationists, why would any creationist think they are going to convince evolutionists? And it would be worth revisiting our articles hyperlinked above for our motivation in compiling these dubious arguments.

Our purpose is to encourage God’s people to avoid fallacious arguments and incorrect information that could become a stumbling block to those who have the background to understand the material. (By the way, AiG has met with Kent Hovind in the past to discuss many of the items below, including the fraudulent claims of Ron Wyatt.)

They're clearly stepping on eggshells by exposing Hovind's bad arguments and shoddy scholarship, since Hovind is popular among the YEC audience. And yet they felt compelled to point out his more egregious mistakes "because of the mistakes in facts and logic which do the creationist cause no good."

I have to grudgingly give AiG some credit for doing this much to clean the YEC house.

[goodseedhomeschool]

What if we question his integrity?"

Sure beats anwering his questions, doesn't it prof
These guys tried that tactic too and they still ended up looking silly.
Karen Bartelt PhD biochemist
William Moore-Wayne State-leading evolutionist
Dr. Terry Prewitt _UF
Nick Powers-UFLA.
Just to name a few.

[goodseedhomeschool]

Me too 5:00 tomorrow central time :)

[Right Wing Professor]

Well, see ALS, I'm also worried why he's selling 'Fourth Reich of the Rich" on his web site. That cover really grabs you, doesn't it? "Dr" Hovind has also been said to have recommended that well-beloved classic, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

[ALS]

Sounds like he's gottem cornered. Hence the animal behavior.

[js1138]

Oral debates are almost invariably "won" by the charismatic extrovert.

[goodseedhomeschool]

Um If I may-
That book sells on his site for a reason.
To research the fact that evolution, marxism and nazism go together.

[Right Wing Professor]

They're clearly stepping on eggshells by exposing Hovind's bad arguments and shoddy scholarship, since Hovind is popular among the YEC audience.

Or, more likely, they're aware he's left a trail as clear as a slug's, and a lot slimier, and want to dissociate themselves before some of the uglier details become even more public.

[js1138]

Patriot does not currently offer a Ph.D. Ther site does not mention them ever having a Ph.D. program, although it is not impossible.

[ALS]

Evos recommend Dr. Darwin's: "A Gnat from a Cat"

[goodseedhomeschool]

OOOOkayyy

[Right Wing Professor]

To research the fact that evolution, marxism and nazism go together.

Don't forget the 'international bankers'. A nudge is as good as a wink there, eh?

[CobaltBlue]

From the NSCE website, recent news of interest re: Texas - looks like creationism got shot down in the legislature this year:

****
Textbook Bills Fail
The Texas Legislature adjourned on June 2, 2003. Two proposed bills with potential relevance for evolution education, HB 1172 and HB 1447, died at adjournment. Both bills were related to textbook adoption procedures and the state Board of Education. Either could have made it easier for pressure groups opposing evolution to have more influence in Texas, one of the largest textbook markets in the country. See previous items about these bills on this page for more details.
June 5, 2003
****

[Right Wing Professor]

Patriot does not currently offer a Ph.D

I imagine if there were demand, and the price were right....

[goodseedhomeschool]

The nasty website dedicated to this fine man are for a good reason. He has the evos running scared. He is more public and vocal than most who fight the lies of evolution. Therefor, he is scrutinized and scoffed at more.

[ALS]

"To research the fact that evolution, marxism and nazism go together."

This is what he worries about.