Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9094 total)
6 online now:
AZPaul3, nwr, PaulK, Theodoric (4 members, 2 visitors)
Newest Member: d3r31nz1g3
Upcoming Birthdays: Raphael
Post Volume: Total: 901,287 Year: 12,399/6,534 Month: 1,892/1,988 Week: 13/460 Day: 13/60 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Scientific vs Creationist Frauds and Hoaxes
RAZD
Member (Idle past 827 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1 of 2 (493868)
01-11-2009 9:40 AM


In Message 369 percy says
Tell you what, why don't you propose a thread to enumerate frauds, misrepresentations and significant mistakes for evolution versus those for creation, and we'll keep a count of each. In fact, if someone proposes such a thread I'll promote it as quickly as I can, I think it would be illuminating.
Here are some definitions:
fraud -n1. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2. A piece of trickery; a trick.
3.
- a. One that defrauds; a cheat.
- b. One who assumes a false pose; an impostor.
(American Heritage Dictionary, 2009)
hoax -n
1. An act intended to deceive or trick.
2. Something that has been established or accepted by fraudulent means.
(American Heritage Dictionary, 2009)
GROUND RULES:
  • it must meet the definitions given above
  • to be a "scientific hoax\fraud" it needs to be deliberately perpetuated by a scientist, preferably an evolutionary biological scientist (cold fusion does not qualify)
  • to be a "creationist hoax\fraud" it needs to be deliberately perpetuated by a creationist
Pretty simple criteria.
Here is a starting list:
Nebraska Man - does not qualify, the initial publication was an interpretation of a single tooth, the rest is mostly all newspaper hype (including the (in)famous picture), and the original scientist determined it was a pig on further investigation. No scientist has since claimed it was a hominid fossil.
Piltdown Man - does not qualify: the hoax was perpetuated ON science, not by a scientist. It was exposed by science.
China bird ancestor "fossils" - does not qualify: perpetuated by non-scientific people looking to make money, exposed by science.
Personally I think we'd have to list almost every existing YEC creationist website (I say "almost" for scientific tentativity, as I am not aware of any that stick to the truth, but it is possible ...). Certainly every one that has a false definition of evolution or that portrays evolution incorrectly is a fraud.
Certainly Carl Baugh (his degree is a hoax, it doesn't exist): Glen Rose Man - fraud perpetuated by Carl Baugh, exposed by science. Baugh (a creationist) continues to present it in his "museum" perpetuating his hoax to gullible people, complete with a "footprint" that the original carver admits to making.
Kent Hovind is a shoe-in (convicted of fraud, his degree is a fraud from a paper mill)
The "creation museum" (showing adam and eve and a vegetarian TRex)
Then there is Harun Yahah (a muslim creationist, who also happens to be a convicted extortionist and anal rapist of underage women) - he puts Hovind to shame.
Is that a good start?
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 2 (493876)
01-11-2009 10:45 AM


Thread copied to the Scientific vs Creationist Frauds and Hoaxes thread in the Miscellaneous Topics in Creation/Evolution forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022