[Ichneumon]

I made no claims for accuracy, just a desire that someone not just dismiss something based on what someone else's paper said at some time past.

But what if that's the same thing their paper says today? The AiG release links to the papers themselves:

http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/Helium_ICC_7-22-03.pdf

http://www.icr.org/research/icc03/pdf/RATE_ICC_Baumgardner.pdf

These are exactly the papers we critiqued earlier. They have not been updated.

The Creationists may not have rebutted that paper, or they may have.

They haven't.

We haven't read their work.

We have.

So, to dismiss it outright is the epitomy of bias, exhibits bad faith, and is frankly arrogant.

You seem to be making some bad faith, biased presumptions there yourself.

These men are not just Joe Schmoe off the street without any kind of understanding of science at all.

Remember what I told you before about credentials?

They deserve to be heard.

They have been.

[jennyp]

You've got mail.