Coragyps

AiG has published their <a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0730usnews_response.asp?srcFrom=fpl" target="_blank">reply</a> to US News and World Report's issue on evolution.
Move along, please, nothing new to see here....

tgamble

Sigh. They really are hopeless. Does Don Patton have his alleged Phd yet? Or is he still a fraud?
<a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html" target="_blank">http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html</a>

Kevin Dorner

That one looks like it was written by Batten, not Patton... coincidentally both Australians IIRC.

Coragyps

I hadn't read it all till just now. Can I be a Cardinal? Or at least a Bishop?

Autonemesis

If the quotes from the USN&WR article are accurate, the article seemed to have a few stinkers which AiG took advantage of.

But AiG still takes the cake: "In evolutionary terms, the most successful humans are those who have the most children!"

tgamble

Oops!

Starboy

Wasn't the original intent of the founding fathers to create an a-theistic government? When I use the word a-theistic I mean without theism not against theism.

Starboy

Albion

Have they got round to responding to the accompanying article on ID yet? That particular piece of tightrope walking might be entertaining.

Had to laugh about this:

In case anybody gets the idea that these are any old senior educators, Emmanuel College is a school that was in the news in March because it was found that creationism was being encouraged in the science classroom (this place is a city technical college, by the way). Predictably, Richard Dawkins blew a gasket and demanded that the school inspectors go back there and sort it out, and the Prime Minister declined to condemn the teaching of creationism on the grounds that it was a very good school and got excellent exam results (to which Dawkins responded that that just meant it turned out better educated bigots). This school has also hosted a meeting about Bible-based education, to which a number of US "creation science" advocates like Ken Ham were invited. So the use of these teachers by the AiG website is hardly surprising but not exactly unbiased.

These people are also affiliated with the Christian Institute, which is a British version of the various institutes trying to turn the country into a True Christian one (I doubt the Church of England counts, judging by the number of senior CofE clergy coming out in opposition to this biblical literalist interpretation of science). The Christian Institute has a number of papers on the reaching of various subjects on a biblical basis (literature, history, phys ed), and it did have a science one, but when the controversy hit the papers, they took that one down. However, it was preserved by the author of Darwin Wars. Read it and weep.

<a href="http://www.darwinwars.com/lunatic/liars/layfield.html" target="_blank">http://www.darwinwars.com/lunatic/liars/layfield.html</a>

Here's a link to the entire Guardian article mentioned in the AiG article, just to show what that quote looked like in context:

<a href="http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,664608,00.html" target="_blank">http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,5500,664608,00.html</a>

pseudobug

You know, Kind Bud, that is the most accurate thing that AiG said. In fact, they are right if they modify the statement to the point that the offspring survive and outcompete those that aren't breeding.