Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Creation Science Hall of Fame & the Maury Tombstone!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    A busy, busy day with the Creation Science Hall of Fame Directors: (6) From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...) To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...) CC: diatheke2@... CC:
    Message 1 of 18 , Dec 17, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      A busy, busy day with the Creation Science Hall of Fame Directors:

      (6)

      From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...)
      To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 13:15:23 -0500

      Subject: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Dear Directors, CSHF and Robert Baty,

      Nick here.

      After doing my research, I believe we have enough information
      to support for us (CSFH) to keep Matthew Fontaine Maury
      inducted into the Creation Science Hall of Fame.

      Robert will probably disagree, but that is his prerogative
      and atheist will always make what ever they want out of it.

      Finding a bust or a statue of Maury with Psalm 8 would have
      been helpful.

      It may still exists, but for now we have enough information
      to support our decision.

      Please see the below information that I was able to find...
      some secular and others not.

      Not only am I recommending that we keep Matthew Fontaine
      Maury inducted into the CSHF, but I am also reiterating
      my position that we need to Induct Dr. Kent Hovind into
      the CSHF ASAP.

      If director disagrees with my recommendation, please get
      back to me ASAP.

      Nick Lally,
      Chairman, Board of Directors,
      Creation Science Hall of Fame

      (snip extensive cut and past from Steve Rudd's Maury page and old ICR article from John Meyer; which was long before the Bert Thompson related article they published and my letter to the editor)

      (7)

      To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 13:28:11 -0500

      Subject: RE: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Nick,

      Steve Rudd's website where you got information from was
      put up after Rudd and his fellows were embarassed trying
      to defend the bible-in-the-hand statue, going so far as
      to claim they found a librarian in Richmond who saw the
      bible in the hand of the monument there.

      The "some have called in to question" is a cowardly
      reference to the work of Todd Greene and myself on a
      discussion group where Rudd and his Maury Mythers hung out.

      Funny, funny stuff, Nick.

      Looks like there are still folks trying to canonize Maury
      into the young-earth movement and maintain that sick-bed,
      bible reading story.

      Funny, funny stuff!

      As I have said before, you are welcome to do as you like
      with Maury and your Hall.

      On the simple stuff, however, Nick, I notice that you do
      seem to explicitly admit that you cannot confirm the claim
      made on your website about that Tombstone at the Naval Academy.

      I didn't think you would, and the world is watching to see
      how you deal with this simple, factual matter and your
      efforts to canonize Maury and his myth.

      It's your Hall to do with as you please!

      I'll try to keep an eye on your efforts.

      Let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      (8)

      From: Terry A. Hurlbut (temlakos@...)
      To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: creationfacts@...
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 13:32:00 -0500

      Subject: Re: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Do you doubt my word, sir?

      I am a native of Richmond, Virginia. I know that city well.
      And I know Monument Avenue, where that statue rests.

      The only reason why no one can "check it out" today is that
      the city had to place wrought-iron fences around it, to
      keep vandals away.

      And once again, you have nothing to offer but argumentum
      ad hominem.

      You try my patience, as I'm sure you try the patience of
      all other members of this Board.

      Terry A. Hurlbut

      (9)

      To: Terry A. Hurlbut (temlakos@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: creationfacts@...
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 13:51:17 -0500

      Subject: RE: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Terry,

      Doubt your word about what?

      I questioned the claim about the tombstone claimed to
      exist at the Naval Academy.

      I questioned the claim that there is a statue at the
      Naval Academy or in Richmond, depicting Maury with a bible
      in one-outstretched hand.

      I use ad honinem in a non-fallacious way and in these
      matters the technique is certainly appropriate.

      Is there something I can help you with in your frantic
      search to find some basis for canonizing Maury and the
      myths into your Hall of Fame?

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      (10)

      To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: temlakos@...
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 14:07:56 -0500

      Subject: RE: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      To All,

      If you are also interested in working on some of the
      difficult issues involving Maury, here's something for
      you to consider.

      Rudd's effort includes the introduction written by Ms.
      Stiles to a book as if that was any better a source
      than all the preachers who liked that sick-bed,
      bible-reading story (I guess the relevance of the quote
      I gave you earlier from page 24 of one of his biographies
      didn't sink in yet).

      My list discussed Rudd's effort to trump up Ms. Stiles
      and that little book some time ago. Here's the link to
      the introductory thread of that discussion if you want
      to do some real research on that sick-bed myth and how
      preachers have used it over the years:

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/18127

      Again, just keep me advised if you are serious about
      getting help with your research.

      Any news yet on trying to find that tombstone at the
      Academy?

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      (11)

      From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...)
      To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 14:31:50 -0500

      Subject: Re: Info on Matthew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Robert,

      The monument I found that Terry is familiar with has
      the Bible at Maury's foot and not in a stretched out
      hand.

      As you know, the CSHF never mentioned a stretched out
      hand.

      Yes, we haven't secured the "first hand proof" about
      a statue and Psalm 8, but as you already know, we have
      taken our information from the late Dr. Henry Morris.

      If the other proof submitted in this email isn't enough
      for you, I don't think more proof would be helpful anyway.

      It seems that you make it what you want it to be.

      After reading about his life, I am thoroughly convinced
      that Maruy was a man of God and did rely on his Bible.

      One day, I am sure that we will settle this point once
      and for all when we find this statue, but for now, we
      will rely on Henry Morris' assessment and keep Maury
      posted as is.....and please do keep an eye on us.

      We welcome it as we have nothing to hide.

      Robert, I wonder what you are hiding?
      Nothing escapes our God.
      He knows our hearts....including yours.

      Nick

      (12)

      To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 14:41:12 -0500

      Subject: RE: Info on Matthew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Nick, et al:

      As always, you are welcome to continue on as you please.

      However, you continue to misrepresent me and my place
      in these discussions.

      I know about the Richmond monument.

      The Bible is not where the preachers
      said; very simple, factual matter.

      And yet, history is replete with how UNgodly the preachers
      are when questioned on such a simple matter as they
      continue their efforts to canonize and caricaturize Maury
      contrary to the facts of history (which are a little more
      difficult to sort out).

      Your website didn't mention a "statue and Psalm 8" that I questioned. Are you deliberately trying to be evasive
      and ignore you problem on the simplest of issues.

      Your website claimed a "tombstone at the Naval Academy".

      I take it you still have not found it and have not
      admitted and/or corrected the matter!

      Did you even go back and read that page 24 reference I
      gave you from the biography. It's pretty standard in
      the bonafide accounts of Maury's life. That is, he
      and seamen for centuries before him knew of the "paths
      of the sea". Maury lamented the lack of charts. He
      did not discover the oceans had currents. This was
      long before he had children old enough to read, though
      some try to put it off on his wife, I hear! LOL.

      Let me know if I can be of further assistance.

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      (13)

      From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...)
      To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:00:55 -0500

      Subject: Re: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Robert,

      I read you comments:
      See just below in red.

      But what you neglected to mention is that Maury was
      brought up as a Christian and believed in his Bible.

      So why not extrapolate that fact to Stiles's story?

      Also see comments below in red.

      Nick

      (attached references and comments snipped; maybe later)

      (14)

      To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:01:46 -0500

      Subject: ! (Oops! Messed up Subject Line)

      To All,

      Nick, it just struck me that you buried a reference to
      an ancient CRSQ article on Maury.

      After I began my Maury Ministry, the CRSQ published a
      cover up article by Trevor Major who was working for
      Apologetics Press at the time. Rather than deal openly
      and honestly with me regarding their Maury problems,

      Apologetics Press sent Major over to the CRSQ to pad
      Major's bio by getting him published therein and to
      cover up for his boss's problems with Maury.

      Ultimately, Eugene Chaffin of the CRSQ wrote, or had
      written, a letter-to-the-editor which I signed and he
      published as if I had written it in order to address
      the problems and the CRSQ involvement in the scandal.

      Mr. Chaffin was not open and honest with me about his
      shenanigans and, lo and behold, two letters to the
      editors appeared in the same edition of that magazine.

      One was the Chaffin had prepared with my signature
      attached and the other was from Trevor Major who,
      unbeknownst to me, was apparently being kept informed
      of the matters Chaffin and I were discussing.

      That's all documented at my place, but I am thinking
      you aren't really doing much research after all or
      aren't willing to actually admit to what you are coming
      up with in your research; the research that would be
      relevant to the issues we have been discussing.

      If you were a member of my list, you could probably
      find a visual copy of the letters to the editor in the
      CRSQ. My correspondence with Chaffin is probably in
      the publicly available message archives.

      Memories!
      Sweet memories!

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      (15)

      To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:07:39 -0500

      Subject: RE: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Nick,

      Wake up, Nick!

      I am running way ahead of you about such things.

      If you want to discuss Maury's religious inclinations,
      we can do that, but I would hope not in the present
      context of allowing you to use it as a diversion from
      your substantive problems.

      There is good reason to believe that Maury was NOT,
      NOT, NOT a young-earth creation-science promoter, and
      that is the fundamental reason why it would seem he
      would not fit into your Hall.

      I got the distinct impression you were claiming your
      honorees would support your young-earth creation-science
      position. Maury said some things that made it clear,
      to me and others, that he would not be "on your side".

      Otherwise, he was somewhat of a gentleman and man of
      his times. He had quite a bit of respect for the bible
      and its cultural effects.

      He wrote a letter to his brother congratulating him on
      having joined up with the "Campbellites", but Maury,
      according to reports, had little interest in organized
      religion.

      I remember reading that it was not until after the war,
      when he was in England, that he decided to join with the Episcopalians, the family religious group, as a result
      of family pressures.

      Were there other matters you wanted to discuss related
      to that. I didn't notice any of that being even remotely
      mentioned on your website.

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      (16)

      From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...)
      To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:12:48 -0500

      Subject: Re: Info on Matthew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Robert,

      Let us talk about the same thing before we all get
      confused.

      We, CSHF, never said nor quoted your preacher story.

      We wrote what the late Henry Morris wrote about Maury.

      The issue is Psalm 8 written on a Maury statue that we
      haven't been able to locate yet. But that doesn't mean
      Maury wasn't all that history claims him to have discovered.

      But you seem to want to dis-credit Maruy because of his
      relationship with God and the Bible and that's not right.

      Maury relied on his Bible.

      Do you have thing against preachers?
      Is there something in your life that drives you against them?
      It may be time for self reflection, Robert.

      Nick

      (17)

      To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:25:43 -0500

      Subject: RE: Info on Matthew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Nick, et al:

      I am still waiting for one or more of you to demonstrate
      a little good faith and come out, come clean, and engage
      the discussion of these important public issues at my place:

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/

      You can follow the discussions there...well, you already
      know about that.

      You can submit messages by simply substitututing the
      following address for rlbaty@...:

      Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com

      Messages sent to that address should be received by the list.

      If you have a YAHOO! account, you can simply join the group
      and make it easier in that your messages could post directly
      without moderation (did you get that, Terry).

      Let's talk about the same thing, one at a time?

      OK, YOU get serious about resolving the "tombstone" claim
      first and then get back to me and we'll consider other issues
      where we may share a mutual interest. Let's see what it is
      going to take, and look what it has already taken, to get you
      to figure out you've got a problem with that, what you are
      going to publicly say about how you came to make the error
      (if you accept that it is an error), and what you are going
      to do to fix it.

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      (18)

      From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...)
      To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:32:16 -0500

      Subject: Re: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Robert,

      I am getting tired.
      Been at this a good part of a day.
      See answers in Red ink below.

      (snip "red ink" - maybe later)

      (19)

      To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
      From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
      CC: diatheke2@...
      CC: fwepboyd@...
      CC: joestephen@...
      CC: seeevidence@...
      CC: temlakos@...
      Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:37:09 -0500

      Subject: RE: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

      Nick,

      You are tired.

      I've just been trying to keep up with you and Jonathan
      Sarfati at CMI and the atheists on FaceBook.

      And, because none of you or them are cooperative, I've
      got to get the messages posted, for the record, at my place.

      Don't patronize me about "religious" quibbling.

      I thought we were going to deal with your "tombstone"
      problem first. I've already got enough for a chapter
      in the book, and I'm waiting for more to see what public
      announcment you might make regarding what looks to be
      your blunder and how you go about correcting it and
      advising others how to avoid making the same sorts of
      mistakes.

      I'm tired too, so I will welcome you taking a breath
      and getting your act together.

      So far, you have flunked your little test.

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty

      -----------------------------------------
      -----------------------------------------
    • rlbaty50
      This might wrap up that discussion for awhile. - RLBaty (20) From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...) To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...) CC: temlakos@... Date: Monday,
      Message 2 of 18 , Dec 17, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        This might wrap up that discussion for awhile. - RLBaty

        (20)

        From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...)
        To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
        CC: temlakos@...
        Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 15:57:23 -0500

        Subject: Re: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

        Robert,

        You saying "flunking my little test" is really taken
        as a compliment by me.

        Thank you.

        Sarfati, I really like that guy.

        Offer to play him in Chest some day.
        My money is on him.

        Yes, we are going to deal with this "statue or tombstone"
        problem.

        The CSHF will address it on our web site on the Maury
        Induction page.

        I just got off the phone with Dr Hurlbut.

        When he has time we will post a note from the CSHF.
        Look for it sometime after New Year's Eve.

        Later,
        Nick

        (21)

        To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
        From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
        CC: temlakos@...
        Date: Monday, December 17, 2012 16:00:15 -0500

        Subject: RE: Info on Mathew Fontaine Maury, from Nick

        Nick,

        If you are interested in anything I might have to say
        about anything, get back with me after we, hopefully,
        get that "tombstone" matter resolved.

        I'll be looking for the announcement from the Creation
        Science Hall of Fame.

        Sincerely,
        Robert Baty

        ------------------------------------------------
        ------------------------------------------------
      • bucksburg
        ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/18127 Hey, thanks for that. I couldn t find it from information on the Home Page, so please include
        Message 3 of 18 , Dec 17, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "rlbaty50" <rlbaty@...> wrote:

          >Here's the link to the introductory thread of that discussion if you want to do some real research on that sick-bed myth and how preachers have used it over the years:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/18127 >

          Hey, thanks for that. I couldn't find it from information on the Home Page, so please include the link there.

          Daniel B.
        • bucksburg
          ... Also, I ve read through that thread, and saw no evidence that Maury wasn t a YEC. Daniel B.
          Message 4 of 18 , Dec 17, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "rlbaty50" <rlbaty@> wrote:

            > >Here's the link to the introductory thread of that discussion if you want to do some real research on that sick-bed myth and how preachers have used it over the years:
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/18127 >

            > Hey, thanks for that. I couldn't find it from information on the Home Page, so please include the link there.


            Also, I've read through that thread, and saw no evidence that Maury wasn't a YEC.
            Daniel B.
          • rlbaty50
            ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/30134 ... Maybe I ll get around to looking it up again, but one bit of evidence regarding that is that
            Message 5 of 18 , Dec 17, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/30134
              "bucksburg" <bucksburg@...> wrote:

              > I've read through that thread, and saw no
              > evidence that Maury wasn't a YEC.

              Maybe I'll get around to looking it up again, but one bit of evidence regarding that is that Maury claimed that the days of Genesis 1 were not 24 hour days; they were not days in the sense that we commonly use that term and that young-earthers claim Genesis 1 means for the term to be used.

              As I have noted recently, dealing with such matters is a lot more difficult than simply trying to figure out whether or not there is a "tombstone" of Maury at the U.S. Naval Academy.

              In both cases, however, I propose that those making the claims have the burden of proof which they cannot meet.

              I can't "prove" that tombstone isn't there, that the Bible isn't in the hand of a Maury statue somewhere, or that Maury didn't harbor the belief that "nothing was more than a few thousand years old".

              I think I have pretty good reason for questioning such things, but it isn't really upon me to try and "prove" such negatives.

              Did I notice Nick Lally suggesting that folks who were not young-earthers are welcome to be honored in the Hall of Fame?

              Really?

              Was that what Nick was trying to tell us?

              I think he was being disengenous in that statement, whatever it was he was trying to evade dealing with.

              Just why is Matthew Maury inducted and not Hugh Ross. Matthew Maury said he didn't believe the "literal Genesis account" (i.e., those are young-earth creation-science code words for young-earth creation-science claims that "nothing is more than a few thousand years old").

              Maybe we will hear more of such things!
              Maybe not!

              Sincerely,
              Robert Baty
            • rlbaty50
              Here s part of what Nick Lally had to say that was snipped from the earlier postings; these were some of the red comments he added to other comments of mine
              Message 6 of 18 , Dec 17, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Here's part of what Nick Lally had to say that was "snipped" from the earlier postings; these were some of the red comments he added to other comments of mine he referenced:

                I had written:

                > There is good reason to believe that Maury
                > was NOT, NOT, NOT a young-earth creation-science
                > promoter, and that is the fundamental reason
                > why it would seem he would not fit into your Hall.
                >
                >> Robert Baty

                To which Nick Lally, Chairman of the Board of Directors for the Creation Science Hall of Fame wrote:

                > On the contrary. We would have inducted Maury
                > just knowing he believed in his Bible as
                > written. I don't believe anyone coined the
                > term "young earth creationists" back then because
                > they just believed in the Bible as written. And
                > when someone matches his life's work with science
                > and the Bible, we accept him or her for induction.
                > Remember, we "honor those who honor Gods' Word
                > as literally written in Genesis"
                >
                >> Nick Lally

                And here is something Maury had to say on that subject:

                > "As our knowledge of the laws of nature
                > has increased, so have our readings of
                > the Bible improved."

                and

                > "I pass by the history of creation as it is written
                > on the tablets of the rocks and in the Book of
                > Revelation, because the question has been discussed
                > so much and so often, that you, no doubt, are
                > familiar with the whole subject. In both the order
                > of creation is the same. First, the plants to
                > afford subsistence, and then the animals, the chief
                > point of apparent difference being as to the duration
                > of the period between "the evening and the morning."
                >
                > "A thousand years are in His sight as one day," and
                > the Mosaic account affords evidence itself that the
                > term "day," as there used, is not that which
                > comprehends our twenty-four hours. It was a day that
                > had its " evening and morning " before the sun was made.

                (Interestingly, the above statements can be found on
                Steve Rudd's website which Lally stumbled across!)

                As far as "nothing being more than a few thousand years old", I don't think the young-earthers are going to be able to establish anything that would put Maury in with them, and I think I have reason to believe he was not with them and certainly would not be with them if living today.

                I think it also important that one consider the context in which Maury wrote or spoke on the subject, the times in which he lived, and his personal skills in appealing to his audience.

                I think if you will read one or more of the legitimate biographies of Maury, one of which I recently noted was available on-line, you will find much added support for my opinions. The Maury described by his legitimate biographers is not the caricature of some sick old man hearing Psalm 8:8 and deciding to go out and discover that the oceans had currents. There was a lot more of Maury's life than currents.

                Sincerely,
                Robert Baty

                --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                "rlbaty50" <rlbaty@...> wrote:

                --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com,
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/message/30134
                "bucksburg" <bucksburg@...> wrote:

                > I've read through that thread, and saw no
                > evidence that Maury wasn't a YEC.

                Maybe I'll get around to looking it up again, but one bit of evidence regarding
                that is that Maury claimed that the days of Genesis 1 were not 24 hour days;
                they were not days in the sense that we commonly use that term and that
                young-earthers claim Genesis 1 means for the term to be used.

                As I have noted recently, dealing with such matters is a lot more difficult than
                simply trying to figure out whether or not there is a "tombstone" of Maury at
                the U.S. Naval Academy.

                In both cases, however, I propose that those making the claims have the burden
                of proof which they cannot meet.

                I can't "prove" that tombstone isn't there, that the Bible isn't in the hand of
                a Maury statue somewhere, or that Maury didn't harbor the belief that "nothing
                was more than a few thousand years old".

                I think I have pretty good reason for questioning such things, but it isn't
                really upon me to try and "prove" such negatives.

                Did I notice Nick Lally suggesting that folks who were not young-earthers are
                welcome to be honored in the Hall of Fame?

                Really?

                Was that what Nick was trying to tell us?

                I think he was being disengenous in that statement, whatever it was he was
                trying to evade dealing with.

                Just why is Matthew Maury inducted and not Hugh Ross. Matthew Maury said he
                didn't believe the "literal Genesis account" (i.e., those are young-earth
                creation-science code words for young-earth creation-science claims that
                "nothing is more than a few thousand years old").

                Maybe we will hear more of such things!
                Maybe not!

                Sincerely,
                Robert Baty
              • Daniel Buck
                ...  
                Message 7 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com, "rlbaty50"  quoted Maury:

                   <<  "I pass by the history of creation as it is written on the tablets of the rocks and in the Book of Revelation, because the question has been discussed so much and so often, that you, no doubt, are familiar with the whole subject. In both the order of creation is the same. First, the plants to afford subsistence, and then the animals, the chief point of apparent difference being as to the duration of the period between "the evening and the morning."
                     "A thousand years are in His sight as one day," and the Mosaic account affords evidence itself that the term "day," as there used, is not that which comprehends our twenty-four hours. It was a day that had its " evening and morning " before the sun was made.>>

                  Okay, checkpoint met. But have you found any evidence to indicate that Maury was a tax evader? I'm quite convinced that he never paid the 3 to 5 per cent income tax imposed by the Revenue Act of 1861, nor the 3 per cent on incomes over $600 imposed by the Revenue Act of 1862, for the tax years 1861 through 1864, and have strong doubts that he even paid for 1865. So he's guilty of at least 4, possibly 5 counts of tax evasion, and with penalties and interest his estate would owe far more than the Hovinds do by now.

                  Daniel B.
                • bucksburg
                  I forgot to specify the Revenue Act of 1864, which imposed a 5 per cent tax on income between $600 and $5000. Daniel B.
                  Message 8 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I forgot to specify the Revenue Act of 1864, which imposed a 5 per cent tax on income between $600 and $5000.

                    Daniel B.
                  • PIASAN@aol.com
                    From: Daniel Buck Okay, checkpoint met. But have you found any evidence to indicate that Maury was a tax evader? I m quite convinced that he never paid the 3
                    Message 9 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      From: Daniel Buck
                      Okay, checkpoint met. But have you found any evidence to indicate that Maury was a tax evader? I'm quite convinced that he never paid the 3 to 5 per cent income tax imposed by the Revenue Act of 1861, nor the 3 per cent on incomes over $600 imposed by the Revenue Act of 1862, for the tax years 1861 through 1864, and have strong doubts that he even paid for 1865. So he's guilty of at least 4, possibly 5 counts of tax evasion, and with penalties and interest his estate would owe far more than the Hovinds do by now.
                       
                      Pi:
                      Three words.....
                       
                      Statute of limitations.
                       
                       
                       
                    • rlbaty50
                      (22) From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...) To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...) CC: diatheke2@... CC: fwepboyd@... CC: jestephen@... CC: seeevidence@... CC:
                      Message 10 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        (22)

                        From: Nick Lally (Creationfacts@...)
                        To: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
                        CC: diatheke2@...
                        CC: fwepboyd@...
                        CC: jestephen@...
                        CC: seeevidence@...
                        CC: temlakos@...
                        Date: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:22:01 -0500

                        Subject: Robert, from Nick, CSHF Re: Proof, Maury
                         
                        Dear Robert,

                        You told me that you have been researching Matthew Fontaine Maury as a hobby for years.

                        I don't understand why you couldn't have found the following information about Maury within 24 hours like I did.

                        It just goes to show you that you are bias in you research....you have a preconceived mind set of what you want and don't want to find. My observations show that most evolutionist have the same mind set.

                        Below is enough information for the Creation Science Hall of Fame to leave Maury Inducted. He was and is a Bible believing Christian just as the late Dr. Henry Morris stated.  

                        Our only correction was that the inscription referring to the Bible was on a plaque and not a tombstone.

                        I hope this satisfies your objections, but my prediction is that "no it won't"...and I would love to be wrong as you come to know the Truth.

                        In the future you are welcome to question us, but please do so with an open mind as opposed to wanting to fulfil an agenda of denigration instead of trying to help your man kind. Self reflection is good for the soul.   
                         
                        Nick Lally,
                        Chairman, Board of Directors,
                        Creation Science Hall of Fame
                         
                        Ps Look for the "Maury corrections" on the www.creationsciencehalloffame.org web site within a few weeks. 
                         
                         
                        1st proof: In a booklet just below and web address: http://msi.nga.mil/MSISiteContent/StaticFiles/Files/MatthewMaury.pdf
                        You can read that Maury and his wife were deeply concerned over the fact that his invention of the Sub Torpedo was designed to kill people. It reads: (note: also see below in full text)
                         
                        "Both Matthew Maury and his wife, Ann Herndon,
                        were deeply religious; however, his wife
                        was opposed to her husband's underwater
                        experiments because it was an "Unchristian
                        like way to kill people."
                         
                        2nd proof: At the Naval Academy there is a plaque of Matthew Fontaine Maury that reads:
                        (also see below in full text)
                         
                        "AS HE TAKES HIS CHARTS TO SHAPE
                        HIS COURSE ACROSS THE SEAS,
                        WILL THINK OF THEE
                        HIS INSPIRATION HOLY WRIT
                        PSALMS 8 & 107, VERSES 3, 23 & 24
                        ECCLESIASTES CHAP. 1, VERSE 8"...


                         
                         
                        Dedication
                        This booklet, Tributes to M.F. Maury is dedicated to the memory of Captain James
                        Maury Werth, U.S. Navy (Retired), a great-grandson of
                        Matthew F. Maury and the former Superintendent of the
                        U.S. Naval Observatory from 1968 to 1972.
                        September 15, 1917 - January 8, 2008
                         
                        About the Author
                        Howard Cohen graduated from the Massachusetts Maritime Academy in
                        1977 with a Bachelor of Science in Marine Transportation and minor in
                        Oceanography. He served as a Licensed Deck Officer in the U.S. Merchant
                        Marine. Mr. Cohen is currently a Marine Analysis Professional Advisory
                        Board Manager in the Workforce and Development Tradecraft Office. He
                        has written extensively about NGA's Maritime Domain's heritage, products,
                        services, and accomplishments. His articles have been published in Hydro
                        International, Via Inmarsat, IMO News, and NOAA's Mariners Weather
                        Log. Mr. Cohen was a Public Affairs Officer in the Office of Corporate
                        Relations and holds a Masters of Arts in Communications from American
                        University.
                        69
                         
                        Excerpt:
                        Maupin-Maury House.
                        A postcard from the early 1900s of the
                        Maupin-Maury house. Built in 1846 by
                        Dr. Socrates Maupin, a founding faculty
                        member of Medical College of Virginia
                        (MCV). Dr. Maupin subsequently
                        sold the house to Robert H. Maury.
                        Matthew Maury lived in this house
                        with his cousin Robert on 1105 East
                        Clay Street, Richmond from April 1861
                        until September 1862 when he left the
                        country to serve in England. Within this
                        house, he conducted experiments in a
                        bathtub to develop the first electrically
                        controlled underwater mine—then called
                        the "submarine torpedo." In the book, A
                        brief sketch of the work of Matthew Fontaine
                        Maury during the war, 1861-1865, by his
                        son, Richard L. Maury, he writes, "His
                        initial experiments to explode minute
                        charges of powder under water, were
                        made with an ordinary tub in his chamber
                        at the house of his cousin, Robert H.
                        Maury...The batteries were loaned by the
                        Richmond Medical College, which also
                        freely tendered the use of its laboratory..."
                        Miss Belle Maury, the daughter of R. H.
                        Maury, who was ten at the time, remembers
                        servants hauling tubs of water to the third
                        floor front room for the experiments. Both
                        Matthew Maury and his wife, Ann Herndon,
                        were deeply religious; however, his wife
                        was opposed to her husband's underwater
                        experiments because it was an "Unchristian
                        like way to kill people."
                        On October 26, 1910, in a ceremony presided
                        over by Governor William Hodges Mann, a
                        tablet containing the following inscription
                        was unveiled by Maury's granddaughter, Miss
                        Amy McRae Werth:
                        The MCV Alumni Association purchased the
                        Maupin-Maury House in 1943 and in 1993
                        renovated and relocated the house to 1016
                        East Clay Street. The Alumni Association is
                        located on the ground floor and the School
                        of Medicine Development office is located on
                        the 3rd floor. The originally site is also part of
                        the MCV campus and has a bronze plaque of
                        the same inscription. Maury never returned to
                        Richmond.
                         
                         
                         
                        MATTHEW FONTAINE MAURY
                        PATHFINDER OF THE SEAS
                        THE GENIUS WHO FIRST SNATCHED
                        FROM THE OCEAN AND ATMOSHERE
                        THE SECRET OF THEIR LAWS.
                        BORN JANUARY 14TH, 1806
                        DIED AT LEXINGTON, VA. FEBRUARY 1ST, 1873
                        CARRIED THROUGH GOSHEN PASS TO HIS FINAL
                        RESTING PLACE IN RICHMOND, VIRGINIA.
                        EVERY MARINER
                        FOR COUNTLESS AGES,
                        AS HE TAKES HIS CHARTS TO SHAPE
                        HIS COURSE ACROSS THE SEAS,
                        WILL THINK OF THEE
                        HIS INSPIRATION HOLY WRIT
                        PSALMS 8 & 107, VERSES 3, 23 & 24
                        ECCLESIASTES CHAP. 1, VERSE 8
                        A TRIBUTE BY HIS NATIVE STATE
                        VIRGINIA
                        1923
                         
                        Top: photo courtesy Manuscript Division, Library of
                        Congress.

                        -----------------
                        -----------------
                      • rlbaty50
                        (23) To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...) From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...) CC: diatheke2@... CC: fwepboyd@... CC: joestephen@... CC: seeevidence@... CC:
                        Message 11 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment

                          (23)

                          To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
                          From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
                          CC: diatheke2@...
                          CC: fwepboyd@...
                          CC: joestephen@...
                          CC: seeevidence@...
                          CC: temlakos@...
                          Date: December 18, 2012 12:53:20 -0500

                          Subject: RE: Robert, from Nick, CSHF Re: Proof, Maury

                          Nick,

                          I would be glad to discuss in detail any particulars you may have an
                          interest in regarding Maury.

                          Maury had a long and illustrious history quite unlike the caricature
                          that you and others seem intent on perpetuating.

                          I recently quoted Maury at my place where he is reported to have
                          said that he did NOT believe the days of Genesis 1 were 24 hour days
                          as seems to be a requirement for your Hall, though your mission
                          statement is cleverly designed for some plausible deniability if you
                          set your hearts on inducting someone. 

                          And the references I gave you could have found on Rudd's page
                          which you earlier cited.

                          As I have repeatedly stated, you are welcome to induct Maury and
                          Hovind.  I gave you some of my feedback on the matters and am
                          prepared to defend and further explore my evaluations of both
                          men as well as opine about your pursuits with the Hall and your
                          affections for the Maury Myth and criminal antics of Hovind.

                          If there are closed minds involved in these discussions, Nick,
                          they are NOT on this side of the monitor.

                          You might want to go back and review the record and reflect
                          on the UNgodly ways in which y'all have dealt with my simple
                          and appropriate advice to you concerning the problems you
                          had, have and are going to have in claiming Maury and Hovind
                          as honorees.

                          Matthew 7:1,2
                          James 3:1

                          I'll continue to look forward to your public announcement admitting
                          your tombstone error, explaining how you came to make it so that
                          others don't fall for the same sort of thing, and correcting it; as if
                          you just might do that instead of simply correcting the error and
                          covering it up as is typical and as has been a topic of discussion
                          recently at my place.

                          Sincerely,
                          Robert Baty


                          ---------------------------------
                          ---------------------------------
                        • rlbaty50
                          ... Earlier, you may remember, Nick referred me to the Hall s mission statement and standards regarding who they sought to induct, and I remind our readers of
                          Message 12 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Nick Lally, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Creation Science Hall of Fame, most recently wrote:

                            > Below is enough information for the Creation
                            > Science Hall of Fame to leave Maury Inducted.
                            >
                            > He was and is a Bible believing Christian
                            > just as the late Dr. Henry Morris stated.

                            Earlier, you may remember, Nick referred me to the Hall's mission statement and standards regarding who they sought to induct, and I remind our readers of what is found there:

                            http://creationsciencehalloffame.org/

                            > The mission of the Creation Science Hall of
                            > Fame is to...honor those who honored God's
                            > Word as literally written in Genesis.

                            What does that mean, Nick!

                            http://creationsciencehalloffame.org/

                            > Induction
                            >
                            > The chief criterion is this: the Creation
                            > Science Hall of Fame seeks men and women
                            > who have honored God's Word as literally
                            > written in Genesis and have worked toward
                            > that end during their lifetimes.

                            What does that mean, Nick!

                            Matthew Fontaine Maury is reported to have written or spoken:

                            > "As our knowledge of the laws of nature
                            > has increased, so have our readings of
                            > the Bible improved."

                            and

                            > "I pass by the history of creation as it is
                            > written on the tablets of the rocks and in
                            > the Book of Revelation, because the question
                            > has been discussed so much and so often,
                            > that you, no doubt, are familiar with the
                            > whole subject. In both the order of creation
                            > is the same. First, the plants to afford
                            > subsistence, and then the animals, the chief
                            > point of apparent difference being as to the
                            > duration of the period between "the evening
                            > and the morning."
                            >
                            > "A thousand years are in His sight as one
                            > day," and the Mosaic account affords evidence
                            > itself that the term "day," as there used,
                            > is not that which comprehends our twenty-four
                            > hours.
                            >
                            > It was a day that had its " evening
                            > and morning " before the sun was made.

                            What to you think those statements indicate, Nick!

                            Sincerely,
                            Robert Baty
                          • rlbaty50
                            There still seems to be some posting problems going on with YAHOO!, so I m reposting this using the rich text feature that seems to get better results and
                            Message 13 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment
                              There still seems to be some posting problems going on with YAHOO!, so I'm reposting this using the "rich text" feature that seems to get better results and see if I can tell any difference:

                              Nick Lally, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Creation Science Hall of Fame, most recently wrote:

                              > Below is enough information for the Creation
                              > Science Hall of Fame to leave Maury Inducted.
                              >
                              > He was and is a Bible believing Christian
                              > just as the late Dr. Henry Morris stated. 

                              Earlier, you may remember, Nick referred me to the Hall's mission statement and standards regarding who they sought to induct, and I remind our readers of what is found there:

                              http://creationsciencehalloffame.org/

                              > The mission of the Creation Science Hall of
                              > Fame is to...honor those who honored God's
                              > Word as literally written in Genesis.

                              What does that mean, Nick!

                              http://creationsciencehalloffame.org/

                              > Induction
                              >
                              > The chief criterion is this: the Creation
                              > Science Hall of Fame seeks men and women
                              > who have honored God's Word as literally
                              > written in Genesis and have worked toward
                              > that end during their lifetimes.

                              What does that mean, Nick!

                              Matthew Fontaine Maury is reported to have written or spoken:

                              > "As our knowledge of the laws of nature
                              > has increased, so have our readings of
                              > the Bible improved."

                              and

                              > "I pass by the history of creation as it is
                              > written on the tablets of the rocks and in
                              > the Book of Revelation, because the question
                              > has been discussed so much and so often,
                              > that you, no doubt, are familiar with the
                              > whole subject. In both the order of creation
                              > is the same. First, the plants to afford
                              > subsistence, and then the animals, the chief
                              > point of apparent difference being as to the
                              > duration of the period between "the evening
                              > and the morning."
                              >
                              > "A thousand years are in His sight as one
                              > day," and the Mosaic account affords evidence
                              > itself that the term "day," as there used,
                              > is not that which comprehends our twenty-four
                              > hours.
                              >
                              > It was a day that had its " evening
                              > and morning " before the sun was made.

                              What to you think those statements indicate, Nick!

                              Maybe we can look forward to the Hall of Fame also inducting the likes of Hugh Ross and John Clayton and so many other old-earthers in the near future.

                              Sincerely,
                              Robert Baty

                            • rlbaty50
                              (24) To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...) From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...) CC: diatheke2@... CC: fwepboyd@... CC: joestephen@... CC: seeevidence@... CC:
                              Message 14 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                (24)

                                To: Nick Lally (creationfacts@...)
                                From: Robert Baty (rlbaty@...)
                                CC: diatheke2@...
                                CC: fwepboyd@...
                                CC: joestephen@...
                                CC: seeevidence@...
                                CC: temlakos@...
                                Date: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 15:29:23 -0500

                                Subject: Speaking of bias!

                                Nick,

                                I just posted the following to my list, and would welcome any rebuttal evidence from Maury's actual life that would indicate he meets those standards and the mission of your Hall that you previously referred me to.

                                Also, I got thousands of hits when I googled the Maury tombstone at the U.S. Naval Academy, so you've got a lot of work to do if you are going to contribute to helping others who were deceived by Morris and others regarding such a simple matter. Knowing what I got when I tried to help you out on that, the prospects that you and yours would be any more receptive on the "weightier" matters is rather slim and your antics have demonstrated that.  (I notice that you Hall website, a few minutes ago, still had the tombstone reference.)

                                What I posted:

                                Nick Lally, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Creation Science Hall of Fame, most recently wrote:

                                > Below is enough information for the Creation
                                > Science Hall of Fame to leave Maury Inducted.
                                >
                                > He was and is a Bible believing Christian
                                > just as the late Dr. Henry Morris stated. 

                                Earlier, you may remember, Nick referred me to the Hall's mission statement and standards regarding who they sought to induct, and I remind our readers of what is found there:

                                http://creationsciencehalloffame.org/

                                > The mission of the Creation Science Hall of
                                > Fame is to...honor those who honored God's
                                > Word as literally written in Genesis.

                                What does that mean, Nick!

                                http://creationsciencehalloffame.org/

                                > Induction
                                >
                                > The chief criterion is this: the Creation
                                > Science Hall of Fame seeks men and women
                                > who have honored God's Word as literally
                                > written in Genesis and have worked toward
                                > that end during their lifetimes.

                                What does that mean, Nick!

                                Matthew Fontaine Maury is reported to have written or spoken:

                                > "As our knowledge of the laws of nature
                                > has increased, so have our readings of
                                > the Bible improved."

                                and

                                > "I pass by the history of creation as it is
                                > written on the tablets of the rocks and in
                                > the Book of Revelation, because the question
                                > has been discussed so much and so often,
                                > that you, no doubt, are familiar with the
                                > whole subject. In both the order of creation
                                > is the same. First, the plants to afford
                                > subsistence, and then the animals, the chief
                                > point of apparent difference being as to the
                                > duration of the period between "the evening
                                > and the morning."
                                >
                                > "A thousand years are in His sight as one
                                > day," and the Mosaic account affords evidence
                                > itself that the term "day," as there used,
                                > is not that which comprehends our twenty-four
                                > hours.
                                >
                                > It was a day that had its " evening
                                > and morning " before the sun was made.

                                What to you think those statements indicate, Nick!

                                Maybe we can look forward to the Hall of Fame also inducting the likes of Hugh Ross and John Clayton and so many other old-earthers in the near future.

                                Sincerely,
                                Robert Baty


                                -----------------------------
                                -----------------------------
                              • rlbaty50
                                (25) Here are some additional observations which I also will be forwarding to Nick and his fellow board members: ... Say what, Nick? Say what? ... Cute, huh!
                                Message 15 of 18 , Dec 18, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  (25)

                                  Here are some additional observations which I also will be forwarding to Nick and his fellow board members:

                                  Nick Lally wrote, in part:

                                  > You told me that you have been researching
                                  > Matthew Fontaine Maury as a hobby for years.
                                  > I don't understand why you couldn't have
                                  > found the following information about Maury
                                  > within 24 hours like I did.
                                  >
                                  > It just goes to show you that you are bias
                                  > in you research....you have a preconceived
                                  > mind set of what you want and don't want to
                                  > find.
                                  >
                                  > 1st proof:...You can read that Maury and his
                                  > wife were deeply concerned over the fact that
                                  > his invention of the Sub Torpedo was designed
                                  > to kill people. It reads:
                                  >
                                  >> "Both Matthew Maury and his wife,
                                  >> Ann Herndon, were deeply religious...

                                  Say what, Nick?
                                  Say what?

                                  Remember when I wrote earlier, in part:

                                  > If you (Nick Lally) want to discuss
                                  > Maury's religious inclinations...

                                  You, Nick, popped off with:

                                  > Robert, that is just the point,
                                  > I (Nick Lally) believe Maury
                                  > wasn't religious...

                                  Cute, huh!  Nick makes fun of my reference to Maury and the "religious" issue, and then tries to impress me with his own reference to Maury's alleged "religious" inclinations.

                                  Bias?
                                  Hypocrisy?

                                  I report, you decide!

                                  Sincerely,
                                  Robert Baty





                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.