Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
CreationEvolutionDesign
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Message search is now enhanced, find messages faster. Take it for a spin.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.
Having problems with message search? Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
Evolutionary misquoting   Message List  
Reply | Forward Message #12594 of 14669 |


Hello everyone - the name's Jim, although I respond to "Zhimbo" just
fine.

The recent discussion on misquoting touches upon a particular
question I've asked in the past, with little respone, in other
groups.

In "What is Creation Science?", by Henry Morris and Gary Parker, we
can read the following:

quote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------

Question: "Isn't it unethical for creationists, in order to support
their arguments, to quote evolutionists out of context?"
Answer: [...]With only rare exceptions, however, creationists always
are meticulously careful to quote accurately and in context.
Evolutionists have apparently searched creationist writings looking
for such exceptions and, out of hundreds or thousands of quotes
which have been used, have been able to find only two or three which
they have been able to interpret as misleading. Even these, if
carefully studied, in full light of their own contexts, will be
found to be quite fair and accurate in their representation of the
situation under discussion. On the other hand, evolutionists
frequently quote creationist writings badly out of context. [...]In
any case, evolutionists much more frequently and more flagrantly
quote creationists out of context than creationists do evolutionists.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------

In one of my [...]'s, Morris/Parker handwave a couple of examples of
the "types" of misquotes that supposedly appear "frequently" in anti-
creationist writings - but give no specific citations.

Ironically, there are more than "two or three" serious misquotes in
the same book as the above quote - but I don't recall ever having a
specific discussion of any single "flagrant" misquote by an anti-
creationist writer.

So...does anyone know of any? Have any creationists made a point of
documenting these "frequent" and "flagrant" misquotes and out-of-
context quotes?

Are there really so many "flagrant" misquotes from the evolutionary
analogs of Morris and Parker and Gish, et al. You know: Dawkins?
Gould? Eldridge? Futuyama? Ruse? People who make it a point to write
books about evolution and/or against creationism; people who are
recognized leaders or experts among mainstream science folks?









Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:09 am

zhimbo
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email

Forward
Message #12594 of 14669 |
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

Hello everyone - the name's Jim, although I respond to "Zhimbo" just fine. The recent discussion on misquoting touches upon a particular question I've asked in...
zhimbo@...
zhimbo
Offline Send Email
Mar 19, 2005
1:15 am

Group On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:09:20 -0000, zhimbo@... wrote: JN>Hello everyone - the name's Jim, although I respond to "Zhimbo" just ... Welcome to Jim....
Stephen E. Jones
cedmember
Offline Send Email
Mar 19, 2005
2:19 am

... PK: The misquotation issue is a tempest in a teapot. Get on with discussing the issues relevant to the group topic....
Paul
pk4_paul
Offline Send Email
Mar 19, 2005
3:47 am

... There's certainly a lot to commend this point of view - quotations of other people's opinions is not the best way to argue the validity of a scientific...
zhimbo@...
zhimbo
Offline Send Email
Mar 19, 2005
5:20 am

Your Amazon link showed much more vitriol and innuendo in the reactions from the anti-Creationists posting than from those sympathetic, an example of Morris'...
Alan C
gigacoder
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2005
12:58 am

... reactions ... like "Science ... they ... even ... about "The ... there were ... echoing ... Again, I'm teased but disappointed. More assurances that, yes, ...
zhimbo@...
zhimbo
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2005
2:57 am

Let us be clear about the use by Creationists of the Eldridge-Gould claim for "support" in the fossil record for their punctuated equilibrium. All the...
Alan C
gigacoder
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2005
8:34 pm

Just one P.S. on the "quoting" and "context" thing, on Darwin's eye, a reader is assumed to have gotten past third grade, generally, and needs no help to...
Alan C
gigacoder
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2005
8:44 pm

... eye, a ... needs ... and ... But the most advanced reader in the world isn't psychic. M&P blatantly mischaracterize Darwin's opinion, and stop quoting ...
zhimbo@...
zhimbo
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2005
1:27 am

... it ... text ... This is ... because in ... record ... leading back ... against ... Without talking about a specific example of misquoting, it's hard to ...
zhimbo@...
zhimbo
Offline Send Email
Mar 21, 2005
1:30 am

... his ... to non- ... *is* "out ... of these ... I can do that, but I am still interested in what creationists believe are examples of evolutionist...
zhimbo@...
zhimbo
Offline Send Email
Mar 19, 2005
5:04 am

... Just to be clear...I know these aren't "examples" per se...they're abstract criteria. I don't want to deal with specific examples unless there's prior...
zhimbo@...
zhimbo
Offline Send Email
Mar 19, 2005
5:46 am

... PK: You would think that evolutionists, who claim their theory is solidly grounded in evidence, would want to do just that. Instead they seem intent on ...
Paul
pk4_paul
Offline Send Email
Mar 20, 2005
1:23 am
Advanced

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help