Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

In <jason-3012051612000001@pm4-broad-41.snlo.dialup.fix.net>,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

Did you do any research on Dr. Steven Austin? It states in the book
that he graduated from Penn. State Univ. He has a doctorate in Geology.
It also states that he wrote "numerous research papers".

Where are these "numerous" papers?

Jason unconditionally believes everything the ICR or Gish claims and will
not subject those claims to any sort of critical analysis

Mark K. Bilbo wrote:

In <jason-3012051612000001@pm4-broad-41.snlo.dialup.fix.net>,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

Did you do any research on Dr. Steven Austin? It states in the book that
he graduated from Penn. State Univ. He has a doctorate in Geology. It also
states that he wrote "numerous research papers".

Where are these "numerous" papers?

Jason unconditionally believes everything the ICR or Gish claims and
will not subject those claims to any sort of critical analysis

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 16:12:00 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism

In article <n6bbr1ti15lffbt8qd3nt778pgnc74t73i@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 13:11:00 -0800, in alt.atheism

In article <gg0br194idt5b020b3822s75cunchnduks@4ax.com>, John Baker
<nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 07:02:30 -0800,

In article <s139r1t2d6m34gpojq44m2o5nq795onpp2@4ax.com>, Matt

<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 12:21:29 -0800, in alt.atheism ,

In article <0jc8r1l88pig0llg95o3o4rsp7nfs17elr@4ax.com>, Matt

Silberstein

<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 21:23:53 -0800, in alt.atheism ,

(Jason) in

wrote:

[snip]

If ICR wrote the book for geologists instead of

non-professionals--how

many geologists would buy copies of the book?
ICR wants to sell thousands of copies--not hundreds of copies.
I also enjoyed visiting the Grand Canyon. It was beautiful.

So the issue is sales numbers, not presentation of the data. Makes
sense to me. This is one of the more accurate claims you

Do you think that evolutionists that have Ph.D. degrees have

written books

that non-professionals could easily understand?

What is your point?

I doubt that Dr. John Morris
and Dr. Gish are the only people that have Ph.D degrees that are

interested

in sales numbers. Have you considered that the staff members at

ICR are

not only interested in sales numbers but also interested in the

presentation

of the data.

The problem is that, as we agree, they write just for sales, but they
also claim to be the technical experts. (Why the "Dr." by their name,
are you that insecure?)

It's my guess

"It's my guess.." "In my opinion..." "I believe..."

Tell me, Jason. Do you actually *know* anything at all, or is your
entire worldview made up of guesses, opinions and beliefs?

that evolutionists that have Ph.D. degrees would like to
sell as many copies of their books as possible. They probably

on the covers of their books that they have Ph.D. degrees. Dr.

and Dr. Steven A. Austin are technical experts in the field of geology.
It's possible to write a book that is easy for non-professionals to
understand but to also include in the book an excellent

the data".

Yes it is. I'd recommend Hawking's 'A Brief History Of Time' as a good
example.

Morris, on the other hand, may well be a "technical expert in the
field of geology", but you'd never know that from reading his book.

Hello,
I have no doubt that if you read the thesis that Dr. John Morris had to
write in order to receive his Ph.D. degree that you would agree that he is
as well educated and intelligent as any of the geology professors that
taught you while you were in college. I recently read a book that was
written by a doctor. He wrote the book in such a way that it was easy for
non-professional people to understand. I'm sure that the same doctor could
have written a book that could only be understood by doctors and medical
students. I see nothing wrong with Dr. Morris writing books that
non-professional people can easily understand.

John Morris may have been a scientist once, I do not know, but nothing
in his CV tells me he was. Though a Ph D in geological engineering is
not a scientific degree since it is an engineering degree, the vast
majority of engineers with Ph Ds are quite well prepared to do science
if they choose. His dissertation appears to be a very technical
engineering treatise that has nothing to do with biology or the history
of life on earth. He also has a now-defunct patent for self-bursting
coal pellets. That might be neat.

Nothing about his training leads me to believe that he is qualified to
make pronouncements about the history of the earth or life on the earth
that are worth any more than the pronouncements of Jerry Falwell.

Did you do any research on Dr. Steven Austin? It states in the book that
he graduated from Penn. State Univ. He has a doctorate in Geology. It also
states that he wrote "numerous research papers".

For some reason the ICR doesn't provide a list of his significant
papers. Gish, on the other hand, they gave us a great list of papers for
-- a list that showed that Gish abandoned science throughout the sixties
and then returned for a short while before he abandoned it completely in
the late seventies.

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 07:02:30 -0800, in alt.atheism ,

In article <s139r1t2d6m34gpojq44m2o5nq795onpp2@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 12:21:29 -0800, in alt.atheism ,

In article <0jc8r1l88pig0llg95o3o4rsp7nfs17elr@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 21:23:53 -0800, in alt.atheism ,

If ICR wrote the book for geologists instead of non-professionals--how
many geologists would buy copies of the book?
ICR wants to sell thousands of copies--not hundreds of copies.
I also enjoyed visiting the Grand Canyon. It was beautiful.

So the issue is sales numbers, not presentation of the data. Makes
sense to me. This is one of the more accurate claims you have made.

Do you think that evolutionists that have Ph.D. degrees have written books
that non-professionals could easily understand?

What is your point?

I doubt that Dr. John Morris
and Dr. Gish are the only people that have Ph.D degrees that are

in sales numbers. Have you considered that the staff members at ICR are
not only interested in sales numbers but also interested in the

of the data.

The problem is that, as we agree, they write just for sales, but they
also claim to be the technical experts. (Why the "Dr." by their name,
are you that insecure?)

It's my guess that evolutionists that have Ph.D. degrees would like to
sell as many copies of their books as possible.

But when they want to do real work they don't dumb down the material.

They probably also state
on the covers of their books that they have Ph.D. degrees. Dr. John Morris
and Dr. Steven A. Austin are technical experts in the field of geology.

And, yet, they have never done any actual work in the field. What
professional papers have they written and submitted to peer review?

It's possible to write a book that is easy for non-professionals to
understand but to also include in the book an excellent "presentation of
the data".

Jason, your posts are not the covers of books. I refer to Gould and
Dawkins and so on and never say "Dr.", I doubt that there books do
either. You continually make claims without doing the slightest bit to
check up.

What's so funny about peace, love and

If ICR wrote the book for geologists instead of non-professionals--how
many geologists would buy copies of the book?

Not many, since it was not peer-reviewed and wasn't submitted to an
accredited journal. Real science has rules.

ICR wants to sell thousands of copies--not hundreds of copies.

Then they should stop claiming to do science.

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:43:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,

In article <ln04r19du4si3srn34rn6sp40ddr2758v7@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:06:07 -0800, in alt.atheism ,

In article <W0nsf.8576$mK.4346@dukeread03>, David Horn
<nospam@devnull.com> wrote:

[snip]

Don't you realize that the heart of creation science is the first
three chapters of the Bible?

Then it is not science, it is apologetics at best.

So we're back to what I told you before. If you can't be scientific

but you

want to believe in it, anyway, forget the science. Just believe.
No one's really going to care if you do that. Just don't expect us
to teach it or want it taught in a *science* classroom. Make sense?

The judge in the Dover court case agrees with you. It's my opinion
that creatian science is based on the first three chapters of the
Bible and science. The Institute of Creation Research has a college
that offers Master's Degrees. Many of the students are high school
biology teachers. The professors that teach at the college have Ph.D
degrees in biology and related fields. Therefore, science is very
important.

Unless, of course, the observations conflict with the conclusions they
have already made.

One of the other posters made the point that the staff members at ICR
that conduct research or teach at the college try to use science and
evidence to prove creation science.

Who made that point? I don't know of any ICR people that conduct research
or who try to use science to do anything. They mention science and distort
reports, but they don't use scientific processes..

What's so funny about peace, love and

The Institute of Creation Research has a college that offers
Master's Degrees. Many of the students are high school biology teachers.
The professors that teach at the college have Ph.D degrees in biology and
related fields. Therefore, science is very important.

Point of fact: The ICR's school is not accredited by any organization
in the world. Their degrees are worthless. They do not follow any
sort of academic standard, and are in fact a diploma mill established
to pump out impressive sounding titles for creationists to flout.