[Dimensio]

You mean you do not find Meyers credible. Thank goodness!

He finds Meyers credible in that Meyers does not accept evolution, therefore the extent of Meyers's work that opposes evolution is credible UNTIL it starts to suggest an old earth, at which point it becomes non-credible.

See, to a young-earth creationist, any work that could potentially be used or even twisted to make an argument against evolution is completely and totally credible, however as soon as it is used to support an old earth, it becomes invalid and bad science.

Similarly, to an old-earth creationist, any anti-evolution work that claims a young earth is credible insofar as it discounts evolution, but only that far,e ven if the attempt to discredit evolution is directly tied the claims of a young earth (or, in the case of YECs mining material, claims of an old earth).

I'm reminded of the "He's not Bush" claims used as supporting "arguments" for Kerry's candidacy.

[jennyp]

I'm reminded of the "He's not Bush" claims used as supporting "arguments" for Kerry's candidacy.

IOW the "A.B.E." theory of creationism! (Anything But Evolution)