|
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
 Posted - 04/19/2002 : 22:47:17
|
There's a new creationist book coming out, see excerpts from it at this site:
http://www.creationresource.org/colorviews.htm
It has some old, refuted stuff, (Moab Man--not mentioned by name), but it has some new stuff which you can see on that page:
1. picture of "fossilized human finger"
2. picture of "hand print" in stone, etc.
3. picture of and claim that a cross-section of the "Burdick Print" has shown it to be not a carving.
Anyone know of these things?
P.S. I'll be going to the "www.talkorigins.org" site to try and check some of this stuff out. Some, such as the accusation made against a "skeptic" who was supposed to have busted up a Paluxy Print is already on TalkOrigins (it's referring to Glen Kuban who discussed that "non-incident" somewhere on TalkOrigins site.
|
|
|
Espritch
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
 Posted - 05/18/2002 : 11:46:33 [Permalink]
|
Well, I haven't seen the book but I would be surprized if any of the arguments were anything really new. Creationists have a habit of just recycling the same worn out arguments in a new guise. There's been a lot of talk about how "Intelligent Design" gives the creationists scientific respectability, but it's really nothing but a rehash of the the old watch maker argument on a molecular level and just as flawed.
P.S. Good avatar choice. You're obviously a handsome devil like myself 
Edited by - espritch on 05/18/2002 11:50:55 |
 |
|
|
Mespo_man
Skeptic Friend
USA
312 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 08:25:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
but it's really nothing but a rehash of the the old watch maker argument on a molecular level and just as flawed.[Espritch]
Enlighten me, Espritch
What's the watchmaker argument? And how do I read a watch face at the molecular level without an electron microscope? 
(:raig |
|
|
|
jec96
Skeptic Friend
USA
61 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 16:39:47 [Permalink]
|
Mespo, the best way is to get a hold of "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins. basically the argument goes, as it takes intelligence to design a watch, so the same for life. Dawkins pulls that one apart pretty well I think.
-It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Aristotle
|
|
|
|
Espritch
Skeptic Friend
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2002 : 17:38:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
And how do I read a watch face at the molecular level without an electron microscope?
What you do is, you get a really big telescope, and then you look through the other end
As far as the watch maker argument goes, Jec96 summed it up pretty nicely.
Edited by - espritch on 05/21/2002 17:40:24 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 05/22/2002 : 22:06:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Well, I haven't seen the book but I would be surprized if any of the arguments were anything really new. Creationists have a habit of just recycling the same worn out arguments in a new guise.
You were right. Many of the stuff on Peterson's site can be refuted here:
http://members.aol.com/Paluxy2/paluxy.htm
note that Peterson had said that the claim that the "Burdick Print" is a fake has been falsified. Yet Kuban points out (somewhere on his site) that YEC Kurt Wise helped show that it IS a fake.
Even more interesting, the claims in Petersons book (to be released this June) have a LOT of recycled (but dressed-up) material from his original 1990 release of that same book! (alright, I know it's not a surprise to you, but humor me)
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
