Gal­way’s let­ter skill­fully avoided sci­en­tific ev­i­dence

The Compass - - OPINION -

Dear edi­tor,

I write in re­sponse to a let­ter writ­ten by Den­nis Gal­way, which was pub­lished in the Nov. 9, 2010 edi­tion of The Com­pass, and head­lined “Cre­ation­ism short on facts, says writer.”

Mr. Gal­way’s let­ter to the edi­tor skill­fully avoided any dis­cus­sion of the sci­en­tific ev­i­dence, ex­cept in stat­ing the “ fact” that there have been in­ter­me­di­ate fos­sils found.

Ac­tu­ally, the only fact is that fos­sils have been found. The in­ter­me­di­ate ap­pear­ance of said fos­sils is an in­ter­pre­ta­tion, not a fact. Last year, Sci­en­tific Amer­i­can pub­lished a won­der­ful piece of pro­pa­ganda de­pict­ing (in a two-page spread) the al­leged in­ter­me­di­ate fos­sils con­nect­ing hu­mans and apes.

I went down this list one-by-one, show­ing that the fos­sils in ques­tion are ei­ther com­pletely ape, com­pletely hu­man, or com­pletely fraud. The di­nosaur-to-bird con­nec­tion is hotly con­tested, even within the evo­lu­tion­ary com­mu­nity. There are huge is­sues with the dino-to-bird con­nec­tion, such as evo­lu­tion­ary rev­er­sals.

It’s also in­ter­est­ing that Mr. Gal­way brought up the Grand Canyon rock lay­ers and fos­sils, as this is an area I’ve per­son­ally stud­ied. For ex­am­ple, the Her­mit shale is in­terbed­ded with, and some­times un­der­neath, the Su­pai for­ma­tion in Se­dona, only 125 kilo­me­tres away from Grand Canyon. So how did younger rock lay­ers get un­der­neath lay­ers sup­pos­edly tens of mil­lions of years older? So much for the ge­o­log­i­cal timescale and the fos­sils only be­ing found in cer­tain lay­ers.

Mr. Gal­way claimed Cre­ation­ists refuse to sub­ject their the­o­ries to peer re­view. This is patently false. It is well known that main­stream sci­en­tific jour­nals refuse to con­sider pub­li­ca­tion of any ar­ti­cle that is overtly creation­ary.

Nev­er­the­less, many creation­ary sci­en­tists have pub­lished in peer re­viewed jour­nals over the years: Dr. Rus­sell Humphreys, Dr. John Baum­gard­ner, Dr. Steve Austin, Dr. Robert Gen­try, to name a few.

There’s a raft of oth­ers I know per­son­ally who have pub­lished un­der pseudonyms be­cause of the open, fla­grant big­otry to­wards creation­ary thinkers in academia.

Cre­ation­ist Dr. Robert A. Her­rmann has pub­lished (with­out coau­thors) 73 ar­ti­cles in 30 dif­fer­ent jour­nals from 14 coun­tries. He has writ­ten over 250 pub­lished re­views as well as seven books.

Of the 300,000 in­di­vid­u­als who have pro­duced ap­prox­i­mately 1.6 mil­lion pub­lished pa­pers or books in the math­e­mat­i­cal sci­ences, Dr. Her­rmann ranks in the top two per cent in the pro­duc­tion of such ma­te­rial. Of those 73 pub­li­ca­tions, 57 ap­pear in non-the­o­log­i­cally re­lated, peer re­viewed sci­en­tific jour­nals. Of the 57, 15 have di­rect ap­pli­ca­tion to his model of Gen­eral In­tel­li­gent De­sign (not to be con­fused with the com­mon “In­tel­li­gent De­sign” move­ment) or the ori­gins of our uni­verse.

Dr. Her­rmann wrote of the peer re­view process: “ To­day, peer re­view rather than in­di­cat­ing that re­sults are sci­en­tif­i­cally ac­cept­able, now in­di­cates whether the sci­en­tific re­sults are philo­soph­i­cally ac­cept­able.”

Mr. Gal­way re­ferred to dark-ages ed­u­ca­tion, but seems to be un­aware that the sci­ences were founded by Cre­ation­ists, and evo­lu­tion has ac­tu­ally hin­dered the sci­ences — es­pe­cially the med­i­cal sci­ences.

An en­tire book could be writ­ten on that sub­ject alone! I will sim­ply re­fer the read­ers to re­search ves­ti­gial or­gans as a quick ex­am­ple of how evo­lu­tion­ary the­ory has not just hin­dered sci­ence, but has crip­pled and even killed peo­ple through its in­flu­ence on med­i­cal re­search and be­liefs.

Ian A. Juby

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.