Francis Chartrand for Rivière-des-Mille-Îles

This page shows some of these nonsense.

The fable of Darwin and Lady Hope

Some creationists say that Darwin renounced his theory on his deathbed, was finally converted, and so on. This story is a pure fabrication, popularized by American évantélistes shortly after the death of Darwin. The story of Lady Hope has never been confirmed by anyone, it made several statements contradict. ( Source ). See also a creationist site admitting at the outset that this argument is fraudulent.

"Newton was creationist!"

Isaac Newton (1643 - 1727), who died nearly a century before the birth of Charles Darwin, has never experienced the theory of evolution, it has not been stated time. The creationism, as a religious doctrine opposing evolution, was born in the mid-19th century. Therefore, Newton was not creationist.

Crocoduck and Bananas

The creationist Kirk Cameron thinks that the banana, since it up so well in his mouth, is proof of the existence of God. (Yes, we know there is something else having the same shape and could also go in his mouth ...)

Kirk Cameron (and his colleague Ray) also say that if evolution was true there would be animals as crocoduck (crocodile + "duck, duck.) Here is a montage representing the beast imagined by Cameron.

The Atlas of the establishment ... a guide to hunting and fishing?

The work of Muslim creationist Adnan Oktar has many pictures of insects and fossils, claiming each time that if the bug is still in its original form then evolution can not exist.

Some shots are actually wrong, and come from a site that sells bait for fishing, as well as insects postiches for the photo and film. On a photo, the authors of the Atlas have forgotten to hide the hook in the bait:

(See Atlas of creating pages 241 and 244 for shots and fraudulently presented plagiarized.)

Dawkins failed to answer a question

Dawkins takes a break

Asked to whom this page responds: "Why Richard Dawkins has frozen when he was asked a simple question?"

This rumor can still be seen in a video distributed by the fraudulent creationist organization Answers in Genesis. AiG knows now that he is a catch, but continues to sell the tape.

The myth

During a debate on creationist asked Dawkins examples of information that increases without the intervention of an external intelligence. He froze for 11 seconds and answered later.

The famous question was to give examples of increased information that would be the result of pure chance. Dawkins could not answer and frozen for 11 seconds.

The facts

Knowing that Dawkins receives no creationists in his home, a band was rather bold move for a team of TV to enter at Dawkins. At some point during the "interview" Dawkins it is reported since the questions were typical of those we hear from creationists. There he froze. The effect has been exaggerated to mount.

It should be noted that Dawkins had already addressed this issue in several previous books like The blind watchmaker and Unweaving the Rainbow.

The video clip without editing:

The faked and the original version, superimposed:

Occurrences of the argument

Youtube video entitled Richard Dawkins stumped by creationists' question, or Richard Dawkins exposed.

VHS cassette sold by a creationist organization.

It seems however that the video aimed at restoring the main facts now placing on the Web, it is difficult to locate the version of VHS with caller added to the assembly.

Stones of Ica

These stones are supposed to be evidence that humans in South America have coexisted with dinosaurs, and therefore that the earth is 6000 years.

However, this is, of course, false manufactured by residents who sell to tourists.

Traces of man alongside those of dinosaurs

These traces of men alongside dinosaurs, or "Burdick print" are an obvious fraud or misleading interpretations. These cases all have a common denominator: the city of Glen Rose, Texas, where there have been cases of fraud carried on exactly what kind of traces. The little documentation that we have concerns marks on pieces of rock previously posted ground, never on the floor, which also indicate that this is a fraud. In addition the origin of these pieces of rock has never been authenticated. The only evidence of their provenance is the testimony of one who claims to have found in the bed of a river.

The morphological analysis of traces indicates that the attempt to make a foot "old" is ridiculous and obvious. In particular, the ratio of the length of the foot and toes is unlikely. In addition, a geological analysis shows that the architect of this fraud crude dug traces on the wrong side of his piece of rock: apparently the men walked in the ground, upside down!

It is often found traces of dinosaur in the bed of the Paluxy River in Glen Rose. They are often eroded and may suggest, through the magic of a photograph, traces of men. These people, however, would have feet of 50cm long, therefore approximately 3m high, that is what creationists forget to mention showing a photo that is not to scale. It is likely traces of dinosaurs as interpreted by human creationists desperate to prove their assumptions.

Conclusion: It is simply evidence of dino is presented as humanities. In other cases, inspired by traces of dino he saw near his home, a joker cut a piece of rock at the bottom of a river, has returned and has carved traces improbable. Some creationists (as Laurence Tisdall) have bitten the hook and still employ this argument to "prove" that the Earth is young, men who cohabited with their enemies prehistoric.

The legend of Mokele-mbêmbe

Occurrences: ASCQ gobbles any raw bullshit about the dinosaur living in Gabon.

This legend is just a legend. The imaging satellite or helicopter could have long certify the existence of giant bugs.

We found Noah's Ark (in Turkey)!

This modern myth was fuelled mainly by the film The incredible discovery of Noah's Ark. False documentary concocted by a certain George Jammal, who later admitted that it was a joke to denounce the credulity of some religious groups face the "religious fraud". The groups themselves seem to be fooled at the point of believing in spite of this confession.

The "wood of the Ark" seen in the documentary was made of wood railroad from California, that Jammal had baked in an oven. Or a little pin that was boiling with the tincture of iodine and... teriyaki sauce.

Jammal admitted never went to Turkey and has produced this documentary for Sun International Pictures, a company specializing in this kind of docu-fiction, which among other on UFOs, the shroud of Turin, and so on.

The man has more in common with a frog with the monkey

Where this argument he been seen? Duane Gish, in a televised debate 80 years.

This argument has probably been launched like that, without evidence, and is therefore rejected in this way.

Plesiosaur decomposing found off Japan

Where this argument he been seen? In the Minds of Men by Ian T. Taylor, on www.creationscience.com employed by Kent Hovind, the National Center for Science Education, Laurence Tisdall (circa 1996, perhaps even today), Kent Hovind (often).

"We found a dino off japan, then the land has less than 10 000 years!" What they want us to believe is, of course, that the earth is 6000 years and that aquatic dinosaurs did not off during the Flood. Evidence in support: this picture.

Unfortunately for these people particularly dupes, "dino" is actually a rotting shark. Tests have shown. There have been several shark half who had broken the same pace. But still, some creationists still employ the argument. They will even add that, in Japan in 70 years it has even produced postage stamps commemorating the "discovery", but that here (because of the indoctrination of religion Darwinism) nobody wanted to admit it was a dinosaur.

Another fun fact: Tisdall conference emphasized that "some people believe it is a shark, but this is not a shark." Point. Without further explanation.

See http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/plesios.html for all the details of this story.

Dust on the moon and conspiracy at NASA

"In 1969, NASA scientists expected that the moon is covered with a thick layer of dust. This was not the case! This proves that the universe has at most 10 000 years. But NASA has denied everything."

Where this argument he been seen? In various magazines creationists dating back 70 years. On this page, during a Creationist conference at the University of Montreal in December 2000 (source).

This story is a total fabrication. It was already known before 1969 that the moon was not covered with a thick layer of dust, first by the albedo of the moon, followed by data collected by the probe Surveyor I.

Hubble Telescope and the NASA conspiracy

"The Hubble telescope has enabled to observe a phenomenon which proves that the universe has 6900 years! But NASA has concealed evidence to silence history. "

Where this argument he been seen? Look at this page.

Joshua lacking Day is another conspiracy of NASA

"NASA has found that a lack day in time exactly when Joshua stopped the time!"

Where this argument he been seen? Increasingly rare, can still be seen here.

The man has a coast unless the woman

Where this argument he been seen? It has almost completely disappeared today but we still intends rarely. Maybe here. But it has seen its hours of glory. The argument was spotted here.

It seems that since "Adam" has created Eve via cloning of a coast, men who are currently living would have a coast and less. It is quite amusing to see that this assumption is based on a design Lamarckiste (inheritance of acquired) and that those who claim this type of nonsense does not clearly give the trouble to verify what they say.

Russel Humphrey, degradation of the Earth's magnetic field

This argument assumes that the Earth's magnetic field is deteriorating at a speed X, and that if the earth had 5MM years, it would be invalid. Although this argument is not a shining example of fraud, document presented to support it is a flagrant deception.

In summary, Humphrey has altered data on charts in order to support his thesis.

The Creationists: persecuted?

Is there an "establishment" against the scientific creationism?

To promote adherence to the methodology and ethics, science contemporary works via a system of scientific publications, which are subject to review by an independent committee of peers and anonymous. This is the famous "peer review".

Both scientific journal articles that doctoral theses go through this filter. Although there are many cases where this is clearly not sufficient to ensure consistent results, it limited to a minimum the event of bias, favoritism, fraud and plagiarism.

The journals, moreover, also publish critical reports and articles published elsewhere (in other journals, books, or independent sources), which reinforces the phenomenon of peer review.

An original thesis, if it is supported and sustained by experimentation, may well be published in a newspaper. Scientific publications are generally very enthusiastic about public disclosure of new ideas and, potentially, a future Nobel Prize.

Thus, several newspapers have accepted for review articles arguing in favor of creationism. However, most (if not all) were rejected, usually because of their academic level too low. In fact, even assuming all the articles, books and texts creationists have been a peer-review (relevant or not), it remains less than a quarantine.

By comparison, a scholar google search for the term "evo-devo" (a branch of the very recent theory of evolution) returns nearly 2000 results.

Why creationists are not taken seriously

The creationists are not free shot in dérisions. There are several reasons for making sure they do not get the desired credibility. Here are a few:

There is no scientific model creationist (or intelligent design). If a group of researchers creationists (?) Developed a consistent pattern, giving themselves the trouble to support it and support it on empirical facts, this would already be a big "plus".

As long as creationism will remain a campaign of denigration of the theory of evolution (and science in general) coupled with a moralistic rhetoric (from right, of course) nobody will take this movement seriously.

Too many arguments creationists are a stupidity to breathtaking stupidity of a breath.

The goal of creationists movements is clearly not scientific. They are in the religious proseletism, political lobbying, the monetary gain, but not in scientific research.

The unpleasant personality and tactics of the bottom floor of creationists certainly does not help matters (see below).

Who persecutes who?

Trying to start a debate on the blog Uncommon Dissent, the blogger Abbie Smith was sexually harassed by a moderator. Having prepared a rebuttal of some of the arguments of the last book by Michael Behe, this lady has been entitled only to sexist insults in response.

Fired of the university where he worked, William Dembski has published on its website a false letter insult by the rector of the university, seeking to mobilize against his admirers management to regain his post. He will say later that it was a joke, but without apology to the rector.

The biology teachers have received death threats from a creationist. (See also here, and here, too.)

Some hackers have attempted to close the sites Panda's Thumb and Talk Origins.

External Links

Sternberg article in The Washington Post

Labels: Art and culture, Creationism, Human mistake, Noémie Cournoyer, Religion and fanaticism, Science and theory

# posted by Francis Chartrand @ 9:43 PM