Valentine Pontifex

I have written a page on creationist quotations:

<a href="http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/quotes.html" target="_blank">http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/quotes.html</a>

I would like to ask for some criticism for it: the grammer, spelling, facts, content, logic, etc.

As it is a work in progress I would ask that no one actually make links to it.

theyeti

Great article LV! Here are some grammatical suggestions to make it easier to read. They are largely nit-picky, but I think they might add considerably to the presentation.

Most of these suggestions are just that -- suggestions. There are always lots of different ways to clarify a sentence, so keep that in mind that these suggestions mirror my own preferred writing style. Also, I didn't check for spelling.

This is a very awkward sentence. Try changing it to something like, "Scientists do overwhelmingly support evolution, but only because they have found overwhleming evidence from many fields."

I would change this to something like, "If creationists want to say that they are opposed to the argument from authority, they cannot reject its use for evolution while simultaneously using it to score points for creationism."

I would add the qualifier "lots of" or "sufficient".

Remove "claims that". It should read, "For example, this site quotes Richard Leakey as concluding..."

Change to: "But what the creationists do* not mention is that Leakey changed his opinion with the discovery of more fossils (including "Lucy") that helped demonstrate that his earlier opinion was wrong."

* Note that the tense needs to stay the same as in the preceeding and following sentences, which are in the present. There are other cases of this throughout the article.

Try: "Creationists often quote non-biologists, who have little knowledge about the field of evolution, as if they are "authorities"..."

There's nothing wrong with this technically, AFAIK, but it's awkward. Try something like, "If the reader would be unimpressed by a biologist's opinion of astronomical issues, then she should be equally unimpressed by an astronomer's opinion of biological issues."

"Creationists also often quote one person or another with little regard to whether the person represents a mainstream...."

"...turns out to have been an obscure nineteenth century figure who was as assistant at the museum; he was never famous at all."

"...a person has, he, like most everyone else, sometimes either says dumb things or is careless with his wordings."

Remove "if".

Change "copied" to "copy" to keep the same tense. Also, put a comma between "writer" and "usually".

Try something like, "If a quoter has not read the original work, then he should not include the original in his citations, but should rather indicate that he got the quote..."

"...are examples of quotes that many find hard to accept as anything other than the result of intended deception." (I like "deliberate" better than "intended".)

"...are quoted accurately, this does not guarantee..."

"In one example below, a creationist quotes a rhetorical question and is not telling his readers..."

Change "be" to "being".

Try "non-human" or "non-human hominid" instead of "not human".

Use the singular. "Another case of a word that...". And put "Darwinism" in quotes.

Okay, I think that does it. I leave it at that for now.

theyeti

[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: theyeti ]</p>

Valentine Pontifex

Thanks to theyeti and Coragyps (who replied via
email).

Both indicated that their replies are nitpicks. But, in the end, constructive nitpicks are what I wanted.
:-)

I have made changes to me documents to reflect their sugestions.

Also if anyone has any suggested links to add to the index of web sites documenting misquotations please suggest them.

Quetzal

LordV: one of my favorite cretinist quote links is Stephen Jones's "Creation/Evolution Quotes" website. <a href="http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/cequotes.html" target="_blank">http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/cequotes.html</a>

SingleDad

Quibble quibble:

Since you are asserting that non-biologists are not authorities on biology, this sentence seems to require the subjunctive mood. Thus it should read:

'Creationists often quote non-biologists, who have little knowledge about the field of evolution, as if they were "authorities" ...'

[ December 31, 2001: Message edited by: SingleDad ]</p>

Theophage

The outline at the beginning is a good choice, but I would like to see section headings in the text which correspond to the outline. You could even keep the headings the same font size, but make them in bold. That will help visually organize the material more.

Valentine Pontifex

Thanks to all that have contributed criticisms
of my essay. I have just uploaded a new version
that reflects them plus a few revisions of my own.

<a href="http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/quotes.html" target="_blank">http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/quotes.html</a>

I will remind everyone that for The Genesis Flood example at:
<a href="http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/quotes.html#s2-1" target="_blank">http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/quotes.html#s2-1</a>
that there is a second page that looks at it more closely at:
<a href="http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/overthrustQuotes.html" target="_blank">http://home.mmcable.com/harlequin/evol/quotes/overthrustQuotes.html</a>