|email - August 2015|
Here is Sam’s response to our apology.
If we were a typical newspaper or magazine, and made a mistake, we would have found an obscure place in our newsletter to bury a retraction which simply said, “Our characterization of Dr. Lumsden’s video as a hoax was wrong. We regret the error.” But we are not a typical newspaper or magazine, so we didn’t do that.
Since October, 1996, we have published 227 newsletters, containing 644 articles. To our knowledge, we have made only three factual errors, the last one being in the June newsletter. All three times we have very publicly set the record straight as soon as possible.
Specifically, this (the August) newsletter contains a long correction to our factual error in the June issue because our error was brought to our attention too late to appear in the July newsletter.
But that wasn’t good enough for us. We immediately inserted a link in the erroneous HTML article pointing to the correction. We also sent out an email to everyone who has ever written to us in the past, directing them to the correction.
One of those people was Sam. He is a frequent critic, who you readers have grown to love (based on the emails we get from you). Sam replied with a barrage of emails.
Sam’s emails perfectly illustrate the truth of the statements made by National Geographic about the war on science in this month’s feature article. Here’s what he wrote:
How spectacularly gullible and naive does one have to be to actually believe that someone like Lumsden would really have been so ignorant about evolution for so long and made the absurd transition for evolution to YEC [Young Earth Creationist] religious nut simply because a YEC student asked him a couple of truly stupid questions?
This is one of the problems with YEC simpletons - you fools NEVER look at anything that seems to prop up your dying Faith with even a tidbit of skepticism.
And you wonder why people laugh at you.
Oh and by the way - nice bit of projection there Do-While: "rude evolutionist bloggers"
You poor poor babies - maybe if you people didn't lie and condescend to all others so often, people might not respond to you IN KIND - which you thin-skinned types see as 'rude'.
It is nice to see that you are at least no longer trying to deny your kooky YEC ideology, that is a start.
We must hasten to point out that we did “look at anything that seems to prop up your dying Faith [in his opinion] with even a tidbit of skepticism.” When usually reliable creationist sources made a claim about Dr. Lumsden, we did everything we could to confirm the claim. When we were unable to confirm it, we rejected it, and declared it to be a hoax. That’s what skeptics do!
We sent this short reply to Sam:
Did you fail to notice that we DID look at the Lumsden claim with skepticism, and initially declared it to be a hoax? But, when we were proved to be wrong, we admitted it.
Here is his response:
So, you really believe the Lumsden witnessing myth? YECs are so gullible.
Lumsden was OBVIOUSLY just witnessing - you know, like how Steve Austin of the ICR [Institute for Creation Research] lied for so many years about being 'converted' after studying at Mt. St. Helens despite the fact that he had been writing YERC [sic] screeds for at least 4 years prior to the eruption.
Tell me Do-While Pogge - why do YECs lie like that? Do they think that it impresses the ignorant? Do you think that nobody will find out?
We believe that Sam is actually the gullible one. Evolutionist bloggers (too rude to quote) claimed that Lumsden’s video is a hoax. Sam is not the least bit skeptical about the bloggers’ claim. He gullibly believes whatever the evolutionists say. He can’t refute the evidence (and apparently doesn’t think he even needs to try) and resorts to name-calling.
Lumsden’s claim is plausible because there are other high-profile creationists with excellent scientific credentials who were originally evolutionists, but became Christians when they realized that the theory of evolution is inconsistent with modern scientific knowledge. But just because Lumsden’s claim is plausible doesn’t make it true. That’s why it was necessary for us to check it out.
Sam refuses to accept a plausible claim, which is attested to by eyewitnesses, consistent with published articles, and a prestigious award. Why reject the obvious truth? Because he believes all Young Earth Creationists are liars; and nothing can convince him otherwise.
Sam is not part of some vast conspiracy. He is simply someone who has been taught by teachers who aren’t part of any vast conspiracy, either. His teachers were just not skeptical enough to examine their curriculum before teaching it.
When you study the scientific evidence, without prejudice, you have to come to the conclusion that the theory of evolution is fundamentally flawed. It isn’t generally correct, but wrong on a few specific details. It is just plain fundamentally wrong. That’s why so many specific details (which we point out on a regular basis) are clearly contrary to current scientific knowledge.
Sam won’t study the scientific evidence without prejudice. Sam isn’t skeptical about fantastic claims made by scientists. He just believes everything “scientists say” without thinking (if the scientists confirm his prejudice).
This brings us back to this month’s feature article about the “war on science.” Sam is waging a war on science because the scientific evidence does not support his personal beliefs. Throwing more facts at him won’t convince him. He only believes people who share his fundamental values.
|Quick links to|
|Science Against Evolution
|Back issues of
of the Month