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

Re: Dr. Fox on Dr. Bert!???

Expand Messages
  • Tamara
    I can think of nothing more boring than reading Bert s rebuttal to 32 pages of anything. Best, Tamara ... From: rlbaty@webtv.net To:
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 29, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I can think of nothing more boring than reading Bert's rebuttal to 32 pages of anything.

      Best,
      Tamara
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: rlbaty@...
      To: Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 11:56 PM
      Subject: Dr. Fox on Dr. Bert!???



      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LURL2004/message/4577

      Message 4577 of 4581

      From: MARION FOX <yoder@o...>
      Date: Sun Nov 28, 2004 8:00 pm
      Subject: [LURlist] Evolution article in National Geographic

      In the Nov. 2004 issue of National Geographic the editors of the
      magazine have an extensive article supposedly proving that evolution
      occurred.

      This article is answered in the following article:

      "National Geographic Shoots Itself in the Foot--Again!"

      (http://www.apologeticspress.org/modules.php?name=Read&cat=5&itemid=2644),

      The rebuttal examines National Geographic's arguments one by one, and
      scientifically demolishes them point by point.

      Yours in His service,

      Marion R. Fox
      http://www.okcsbs.com/

      ###########################
      ###########################

      My comments:

      From past experience, I can only surmise that the claim that Dr. Bert
      "scientifically demolished" any argument "point by point" is simply
      incredible.

      I did pick up these comments from the introduction to the article from
      Dr. Bert's website:

      ########################

      (From time to time, those in the evolutionary community produce
      something that is so outlandish and so outrageous, that those of us in
      the creationist community simply cannot-in good conscience-sit by
      idly and ignore it.
      Several examples come to mind. One of the most prominent was. . . A
      second example was the. . . A third example was. . .In each of these
      cases, we produced extensive rebuttals, which were posted on our Web
      site and/or printed in our monthly journal, Reason & Revelation. Each of
      these rebuttals drew rave reviews for their exhaustive nature and
      thorough content. We wanted those in the evolutionary community to know
      that their shenanigans would not go unchallenged, and that the hackneyed
      canards they trotted out as "evidence" could be answered-easily!

      Now, the time has come to challenge yet another such "outlandish and
      outrageous" production from those within the evolutionary community. The
      front cover of the November 2004 issue of National Geographic asked the
      question in 250-point bold maroon type:

      WAS DARWIN WRONG?

      On page 2 of that same issue, Bill Allen, the magazine's editor . . .
      published a 33-page-long article by David Quammen, which was intended to
      answer that question with a resounding "NO!"
      Mr. Quammen belittled those people who do not believe in evolution,
      suggesting that perhaps the reason they do not is because they live in
      "ignorance and confusion." He then proceeded to employ as "proof" of
      evolution a cadre of outdated, timeworn arguments that, no doubt, even
      many of his own evolutionary colleagues find incredibly embarrassing. We
      certainly are not evolutionists; yet even we find them embarrassing.

      Enough is enough! Bill Allen, David Quammen, John Rennie, and others
      like them need to know that when they produce this type of fallacious,
      erroneous material, we will not hesitate to "step up to the plate" to
      set the record straight, and to offer what the renowned newscaster Paul
      Harvey might call "the rest of the story." And it is a fascinating "rest
      of the story," to be sure.

      We invite your attention to our exhaustive rebuttal of the November 2004
      issue of National Geographic, titled "NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SHOOTS ITSELF
      IN THE FOOT-AGAIN!"

      Happy reading.

      Bert Thompson, Ph.D.
      Executive Director

      #######################

      My further comments:

      (From time to time, those in the "young-earth, creation-science"
      community produce something that is so outlandish and so outrageous,
      that those of us in the larger community simply cannot-in good
      conscience-sit by idly and ignore it.

      Several examples come to mind. One of the most prominent was Dr. Bert's
      Maury sick-bed, bible-reading story. . . A second example was the Dr.
      Bert's Maury statue claim. . . A third example was Dr. Bert's moon-dust
      claim. . .In each of these cases, we produced extensive rebuttals, which
      were made public. Each of these rebuttals drew rave reviews for their
      exhaustive nature and thorough content. We wanted those in the
      "young-earth, creation-science" community to know that their shenanigans
      would not go unchallenged, and that the hackneyed canards they trotted
      out as "evidence" could be answered-easily!

      Now, the time has come to challenge yet more such "outlandish and
      outrageous" productions from those within the creationist community.

      WAS DR. BERT & KEITH SISMAN WRONG?

      We answer with a resounding YES!

      Dr. Bert and Keith Sisman belittle those people who do not believe in
      "young-earth, creation-science", suggesting that perhaps the reason they
      do not is because they live in "ignorance and confusion." They then
      proceed to employ as "proof" of a cadre of outdated, timeworn arguments
      that, no doubt, even many of his own "young-earth, creation-science"
      colleagues find incredibly embarrassing. We certainly are not
      "young-earth, creation-science" hobbyists; yet even we find them
      embarrassing.

      Enough is enough! Dr. Bert, Marion Fox and Keith Sisman, and others like
      them need to know that when they produce this type of fallacious,
      erroneous material, we will not hesitate to "step up to the plate" to
      set the record straight, and to offer what the renowned newscaster Paul
      Harvey might call "the rest of the story." And it is a fascinating "rest
      of the story," to be sure.

      Happy reading.

      Robert Baty
      Owner: Maury_and_Baty

      ########################

      Hey, maybe we will hear more about the history changing (if true) claim
      that Dr. Bert has demolished some scientific claim point by point.

      Personally, I think if you want to read about some claim being
      "demolished" point by point, one needs to review the record regarding
      Dr. Bert's Maury claims.

      Like, just where did Dr. Bert get his Maury statue claim?

      When are people like Marion Fox going to start letting the good brethren
      know how I single-handedly "demolished" the great and mighty Dr. Bert on
      that!

      Talk about the "rest of the story"; we are still waiting for Dr. Bert to
      get about the business of telling us that as it relates to his Maury
      claims and the attendant cover-up he has engaged in.

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty



      Support your local IRS office and ask Keith Sisman to change his vote before another night falls!


      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      ADVERTISEMENT





      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maury_and_Baty/

      b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      Maury_and_Baty-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.