Bible and slavery wrote:
Then why did a scientist from Lawrence Livermore put his name to it? Disagree with your assumption.
I could speculate that there was money involved. Where are his/her colleagues? Why doesn't the ICR's work get published in the Journal of Geology, the Journal of Paleontology, Science, etc.? Because their research can't survive an objective peer review because their work doesn't conform to the standards of accepted science. Gavin Menzies published a book claiming that Chinese ships reached North America without any evidence that it actually happened. And it was savaged in the Journal of World History as a result.
I really hope this doesn't offend you (as much as I vehemently disagree with you, you come off as a very pleasant person): James J. Martin taught history at San Francisco State University. He then went on to write articles published by the Journal of Historical Review, published by the Institute of Historical Review, which is a Holocaust-denial organization. Why did Martin do this? To serve his on biases? The vast majority of historians recognize the full extent of the horror that was the Holocaust and the existence of an organization that publishes papers that will not be accepted by mainline journals does not serve as evidence for anything because the organization and its journal serves an ideological purpose and not an academic one. I write this not in any way to associate Creationism with Holocaust-denialism in any moral way but to demonstrate that despite a distinguished academic career, some people can go off and participate in organizations that serve entirely unacademic purposes.
Do you think that Andy Kaufmann is dead? It's possible he's alive but all the evidence we have says that he died decades ago. But there are people today that still maintain that he's alive somewhere. David Duke has a PhD in history and asserts the
Will you agree that the ICR has a goal of proving that God created the Earth as laid out in the Bible? You can't take an organization like that seriously when it comes to critical analysis because their mission is to achieve a viewpoint. I understand that a lot people think that scholars and scientists as a whole have a bias against god, and I can't say that none do, but within the confines of the field, there is no bias allowed. You have evidence that supports something, or you don't. And if you're like that crackpot who published research claiming that vaccination in children could lead to autism, you'll get found out.