CC: cynic@net-link.net (Ed Brayton)
Bertvan@aol.com wrote:
>> Panspermia--design--Neo Lamarckism-- Kauffman's innate, emergent
>> order--Shapiro's live, creative genome-- all sound interesting to me, and
> >time will tell if evidence for any of them can be developed. If
creationists
> >also want to seek scientific evidence, I see no reason to try to stop them,
> >to belittle them, to doubt their motives or sincerity--or to accuse them of
> >deliberate fraud. (I can't believe legitimate scientists would make such
an
> >accusation!)
>I will only respond to this portion of your message, and only to point out
that
>sometimes there has been deliberate fraud in creationist circles. It is also
>important to note that those creationists who deserve to be taken seriously
>find this as troubling as I do. There has especially been a problem with
>dishonest quoting of evolutionary scientists. The most recent example is an
>absolutely outrageous distortion by Henry Morris of the work of Robert
>Carroll in a recent Back to Genesis article. A legitimate scientist, or
anyone >interested in integrity, should make such an accusation when it is
supported. It >is only a problem when, like Dick Fischer's accusations
against Art Chadwick, >it is not true.
Ed Brayton
Hi Ed,
Personally, I would be careful of accusing any scientist of fraud. It is one
thing to say someone was wrong, but quite different to say they to say they
were aware of their error and deliberately committed it anyway. Pretty
difficult to get into a scientists mind and know intent. I wouldn't not
even state with certainty Pitdown was fraud. It could as well have been a
hoax. Haekel's drawings might be closer to fraud. He did intentionally
alter the drawings. I suppose he was so confident of his beliefs, he thought
it wouldn't matter. Darwinsts (also confident of their beliefs) continually
accuse creationists of lying and fraud. I'm usually not qualified to judge,
but I've also heard Darwinists accuse Behe and Denton of holding positions
they do not espouse, so I am cautions about any accusations by Darwinists.
(Actually, I hadn't heard of creationists accusing Darwinists of fraud. They
accuse them of misinterpretation, yes, but fraud, I hadn't heard.)
Bertvan