Godot

But such wholesale character assassination is ludricrous! It in no way affects the ToE and only serves to place creationists in an even worse light.

RufusAtticus

I looked it up one time and his degree was from the Education School.

Steve_F

To play devils advocate, it seems a little hypocritical to question the credentials of creationists when we spend so much time refuting the allegation that Darwin 'recanted' the theory of evolution on his death bed.

It doesn't matter what a persons qualifications are as long as the theory they put forth is sound. Unfortunately for creationists it, er, isn't.

NialScorva

Well, Creationists make qualifications an issue. I don't think most of us really care what the creationist's credentials are, but if they're going to attack the qualifications of others or wave a store-bought peice of paper around like a battle flag, then a refutation is in order.

It's not that a fake degree makes their arguments bad, it's that it shows a wanton disregard for academic integrity that can't help but color their arguments.

anthrosciguy

Your first paragraph -- one thing doesn't follow from the other -- it isn't hypocritical to question their credentials because we spend that time; it might be considered to be a waste of time, but not hypocrisy.

It is true that credentials are unimportant compared to whether or not the argument is sound, but that's not really quite the issue either. It's whether or not they are being deliberately deceptive, which is relevant. I would say that if someone prominently displays credentials that don't apply in a field (like engineering credentials when the question is biology) that is somewhat but not horribly deceptive. But when they prominently display credentials that come from a diploma mill, that is being deliberately and extremely deceptive, and so is apropos (and important) since it is part of demonstrating their dishonest methods.

pangloss

Well, yes and no.

If credentials were so unimportant, we should wonder why creationists expend so much time and energey embellishing and inventing their own. Look at Sarfati.

Of course, I like to use credentials as a filter of sorts. I see little reason to give much weight to the musings of an electrical engineer when I could be dissecting the claims of an actual biologist. The fallacy of the outsider is relied too heavily upon by creationists. They want everyone to think that 'outsiders' can make major 'discoveries'/analyses of data/evidence that 'insiders' can't because of their 'paradigm.'

The tiome when an outsider could make contributions to a technical science are pretty much over.

Sr. Zonules

well, you know what they call someone who graduates from med school at the bottom of the class....



...doctor.

sorry, I just thought that seems like an appropriate joke

-Z

Roland98

That's the one that should have "State" inserted in the title. Maybe he was just confused...


[Edit: and pangloss, you probably remember when this guy was discussed here on EvC forum--where he also put "Northwest State College" as his institution.]

Skydancer

Point of semantics, here. It does matter what your qualifications are - it doesn't matter what your credentials are. Qualifications can be demonstrated by showing that you have a grasp of the subject and can construct logical, well-reasoned, and well-supported arguments. Waving faked credentials around in lieu of demonstrating qualification is both arrogant and fraudulent. Guess which side of the discussion does that most often?