buckshot23

This seems to come up as if it is standard for creationists to have phony degrees. How widespread is it? Is it what like 2 or 3 or 50. If it is a small minority is it legitimate to paint all of creationism with this broad stroke?

Martin B

Depends on what you mean. I'm sure there are lots of folks out there with legitimate terminal degrees in science and who do not believe in evolution. I don't think people are painting all creationists this way and I would say it is illegitimate to do so.

The issue comes with people like Kent Hovind and Carl Baugh who are so mighty proud of their 'Ph.D's. What they have was not acheived according to a standard even close to the works of a normal Ph.D. graduate. What they have is a joke, and yet they try to spin it into a veneer of respectability that they do not deserve.

Valentine Pontifex

Most of them who claim degrees really have them, but most are not practicing biologists. But that being said, a number of well-known creationists do have diploma mill degrees and it is also common to see creationist being presented as top-scientists when they are not.

Santas little helper

I agree with Martin. I've never seen anyone here paint all creationists with a broad stroke regarding their degrees. But when there are still creationists who believe that Hovind is some sort of scientific authority then the issue of his degree will continue to be brought up.

Anyway degrees are a minor side issue at most. What matters is arguments not the degrees of the person who's making them.

buckshot23

Of course I agree that Ph.D aught to mean something. I don't know the specifics of Baugh and Hovind however. If their degrees are junk then that should be known. I can't recall where I saw this but Dawkins was asked a question about degrees of creationists and he made reference to these small minority of "creationists" who have fake diplomas. Trying to smear all creationists seemingly. Why answer a question like that in that way otherwise? I am going to have to look for this reference. Maybe my memory is faulty and he said something different but I will look.

Santas little helper

Did Dawkins say "small minority" ?

buckshot23

It was from memory and it may not even be dawkins. I am looking for it.

Martin B

Yeah, I would like to see a ref for that. Either way, it wouldn't surprise me. Dawkins has a knack for alienating himself.

The other thing you have to do is distinguish between these 'celebrity creationists' and people who are creationists, don't accept evolution, but never invest any effort to try to undermine evolution. The really vocal lot of creationists who do oppose evolution generally have bogus degrees (Baugh, Hovind, Ham) or degrees in completely irrelevant fields (Sarfati, Walt Brown, Dembski, or Henry Morris). A handful have bona fide biological sciences credentials (Wells, Menton, Behe, Gish) but preface all their arguments against evolution on false premises, distortion, and even downright fabrication and falsehood.

From what I remember, Dawkins was referring to the fact that of the minority of creationists that are out there and very vocal, most hold either fake degrees or degrees in fields irrelevant to biology.

buckshot23

You recall it too? I can't seem to locate it. Any clue where this was said?

Coragyps

TalkOrigins, as usual, has at least a list of creos with known shaky academic backgrounds:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html