a_haworthroberts wrote:Real scientist attacks AiG:
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2013/10 ... eum-1.html
Ken Ham attacks a statement by real scientist:
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29
Phelps stated "the Creation Museum doesn't do scientific research". Ken claims his wrong is wrong and 'irrational' - but in his response he says "Not only does Answers in Genesis and the Creation Museum (which is owned by AiG) have a research division, it is a very active research department headed by an experienced and published scientist". Thus Ham's response addresses a somewhat wider topic than that of Phelps' who only mentioned the Creation Museum. I CAN SEE NO MENTION OF 'RESEARCH' ON THE CREATION MUSEUM WEBSITE. http://creationmuseum.org/
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/ar ... elling.asp
This page gives a biography for the AiG Director of Research - the SAME Andrew Snelling who is already telling the world that the 'Ebenezer' dinosaur must have perished in Noah's Flood. The page talks about 'research' by Dr Snelling whilst at AiG (since 2007). As far as I can make out, he is mainly covering 'old ground' where science already has answers - presumably in order to discredit those answers. "He is currently researching the radioisotope dating of meteorites". Has he actually studied any meteorites first hand? Or merely read the works of people who have done so?
THIS PAGE SAYS NOTHING ABOUT RESEARCH, WHETHER SCIENTIFIC OR OTHERWISE, CARRIED OUT AT OR BY THE CREATION MUSEUM ITSELF.
And an anti-YECism blogger chips in, highlighting among other things the anti-scientific idiocy of Mr Snelling:
http://eyeonicr.wordpress.com/2013/10/2 ... #more-6691
And a US national(?) press article:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html
"“The Creation Museum has asserted the specimen to be evidence of Noah’s flood without any actual research,” said Dan Phelps, president of the Kentucky Paleontological Society".
That statement appears to be TRUE. They have decided in advance of taking ownership of the fossil that because it is in good condition therefore it was rapidly buried therefore it died in Noah's Flood. That is not science.
http://kencroswell.com/OriginOfCarbon.htmlMost of the carbon supporting life on Earth was forged by stars that never exploded, say astronomers in Michigan and Sweden. These stars cast the carbon into space when they blew off their outer atmospheres and became white dwarfs.
Carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen--atomic numbers 6, 7, and 8--are three of the most abundant elements in the universe. All are vital for human life. Astronomers already know that most of the nitrogen in Earth's atmosphere arose in stars that did not explode, whereas the oxygen you breathe came from stars that did explode. But carbon's origin is less clear: some studies place its birth in stars that later exploded, while other studies say just the opposite.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest