A creationist site that talks about cherry picking....that's irony for you.
And one of the authors;
''William Dembski is one of the main pushers of the pseudoscience of intelligent design, specifically his unfalsifiable concept of "specified complexity".
Unusual for a creationist, he does in fact have some actual credentials: a Ph.D in mathematics from the University of Chicago, a Ph.D in philosophy from the University of Illinois at Chicago, and a Masters of Divinity from Princeton Theological Seminary. Now, if only one of those fine institutions recognized Intelligent Design as being anything but an absolute hodgepodge of nonsense, he'd be set
Dembski has written a bunch of convoluted books about intelligent design, including The Design InferenceWikipedia's W.svg (1998), Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & TheologyWikipedia's W.svg (1999), The Design RevolutionWikipedia's W.svg (2004), The End of Christianity (2009), and Intelligent Design Uncensored (2010).
Interestingly, none of his qualifications in any way relate to the natural sciences. He once held a non-tenured position at Baylor University but was fired for being an all-around jerk (he maintains that he was dismissed in order to discredit or censor the research of his newly-founded Evolutionary Informatics Lab). ''
You appeal to blind faith to make the statement about creationists not having credential. In order to participate at Institute for Creation Research one has to have either a masters degree in science or a doctorate degree in science.
Your charge of 'faith' is false. Creationists are free to publish papers, present their evidence just like anyone who works in the field and actually understands the subject matter, they are free to falsify evolution if they are able. But they are not able.
They are not able because their work is flawed. It is biased toward a preconceived conclusion that the world and life is created. So in order to make the evidence fit their assumption of creation they must engage in the way described in the articles I provided.
The creationist material is not aimed at the scientific community but theists who glance over it and get a sense of justification a sense of legitimacy where none exists.
Sorry if that sounds harsh, but that is the situation. Evolution is not in doubt.
Your answer is not harsh. It is silly. Again you make a bold assertion that is not supported by the facts. Evolution is in doubt by lots of people. Watch the video "Expelled! No intelligence Allowed." Don't read someone's opinion. Do it yourself.
Instead of attacking the work of ICR, how about picking one of their current topics of study and bring us your critique.
It is neither an assertion, harsh or silly. Nor am I attacking anybody. You are interpreting anything I say in a way that suits your position and your own needs.
Evolution, unlike Faith, is falsifiable. Being falsifiable, anyone is free to falsify it, including creationists. Yet evolution has stood testing for 150 years and shows no sign of being toppled.
The creatipnist material is flawed for the reasons given in several articles that I have posted. That is simply an observation, not an attack.
