The REAL shame of creationism: its fradulent spokemen

Creationists are well known to bend the facts and ignore embarrassing ones in order to make their case. Such duplicity is not only committed by the scientifically untrained layman, but by credentialed scientists as well. Unfortunately, when scientists or even those with advanced degrees outside science do this people tend to listen more carefully to their remarks, unfounded as they may be. Creationists with PhDs particularly lend a degree of respectability to their cause, such as Michael Behe (biochemistry), William Dembski (philosophy), Duane Gish (biochemistry), and Phillip Johnson (law). Even those with only a BSc, such as Ken Ham (Applied Science), derive a bit more respect than creation promulgators who lack a degree, such as Buddy Davis, Stan Lutz, and Ian Juby. Unfortunately, there are those in the movement who not only play fast and loose with the facts, but go so far as to misrepresent themselves in order to garner more respect for their deceit. I don't know if this is a result of an innate lack of ethics (one would think a professing Christian would be reticent to display such a moral short coming) or simply an outgrowth of the dishonesty that infuses creationism. In any case there are a number of creationists who have sought to trade on the respectability of a degree they never earned.


Probably the best known of these is Kent Hovind, who passes himself off as having a PhD. Calling himself Dr. Dino, Hovind claims to have earned his doctorate in Christian Education. But the school from which he "graduated" was an unaccredited correspondence diploma mill, Patriot University, in Colorado Springs, Colorado (now Patriot Bible University in Del Norte, Colorado). The school's current policies allow students to attain bachelor's degrees, master's degrees and even "Doctor of Ministry" degrees in months, rather than years, for as little as $25 -$45 per month. (source) Moreover, Hovind never completed his "PhD thesis." In truth, Hovind no more has a right to claim a PhD, which he does, than does Elmer Fudd.

Another creationist who traded on a fraudulent academic degree is "Dr." Clifford Burdick. Burdick is an interesting case because he actively sought a legitimate advanced college degree, but when unable to fulfill the requirements, he simply assumed a bogus one from a bogus school. Here is his story by Lenny Flank, reprinted in part from HERE

One of the most widely-cited instances of evolutionist "censorship" of creationists involves "Dr" Clifford Burdick, a geologist for the Creation Research Society and Institute for Creation Research. Burdick, the story goes, was arbitrarily refused a PhD from the University of Arizona solely because he is a creationist (Burdick was the original discoverer of the "Cretaceous human footprints" at the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas).

The true story demonstrates otherwise. In 1960, Burdick, who had never been admitted to a degree-granting program, sat for his comprehensive exam for a PhD in geology. As Burdick himself later reported, "I 'browned out' several times during the exam, and could not answer even the most simple questions, that I knew as well as my own name. Even at that I was told I passed as far as knowledge of geology went, but I just ran out of gas and could not answer the reasoning questions, and being sick did not make too good an impression." (cited in Numbers, 1992, p. 260) Burdick failed the exam.

After filing and losing a lawsuit charging the university with religious discrimination, Burdick went to the Creation Research Society and told them the story. CRS President Walter Lammerts investigated, and found that, not only had Burdick also failed an earlier attempt to defend his MS thesis, ("The medicine I was taking seemed to paralyze my thinking apparatus," Burdick explained (Numbers, 1992, p. 261)) but he had also never received a Masters Degree that he claimed from the University of Wisconsin. At the same time, Lammerts was investigating the claim of David Warriner, a CRS member, who had recently lost his untenured position at Michigan State University. After looking into both matters, Lammerts concluded, "Though perhaps it is unfair to say so, I believe that most of the difficulties which have been related such as those of Warriner and Burdick are largely due to other personal problems." (Numbers, 1992, p. 270) Lammerts advised Burdick to drop the matter.

Instead, Burdick obtained a doctorate from something called the "University of Physical Sciences" in Phoenix, Arizona. Lammerts discovered that the "University" consisted of nothing more than a post office box, with no faculty, no campus, and no tuition fees. Outraged, the CRS demanded that Burdick stop using the "Doctor" title on his CRS papers.

Burdick referred to himself as Dr.--and allowed others to do so---for quite some time. And he is still referred to as "Dr." by creationists. Examples: HERE and HERE






Other prominent creationists who have played fast and loose with academic credentials are

Thomas Barnes, formerly affiliated with the Institute for Creation Research,

Carl Baugh

Richard Bliss, formerly a member of the ICR staff,

John Grebe, a founding member of the Creation Research Society

Don Patton

Kelly Segraves, co-founder of the Creation-Science Research Center

Harold Slusher, formerly of the Institute for Creation Research

source

All in all a pretty sad indictment of the creationist movement.

Interestingly enough, I believe it's actually illegal in this country to claim to be a doctor without a PhD or medical degree from a recognised/accredited university. Someone else who claimed a PhD via a diploma mill was recently ordered by a judge to cease using the title "Doctor" in all her publications and adverts because it constituted false advertisement!

Maybe you should consider proposing a similar law?

__________________

I certainly think someone should. I don't have the time.

Creationist can't answer reasoning questions, oh the irony!

I don't think so.

__________________
You will do me the justice to remember, that I have always strenuously supported the Right of every Man to his own opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies to another this right, makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it.

-- Thomas Paine

FYI, Dembski has recently been caught out plagiarizing someone else's work with no respect for copyright. He claimed not to be aware that the work he was using was copyrighted and altered but that has been shown to be a lie of his: http://endogenousretrovirus.blogspot...copyright.html

A thief and dishonest when caught in it to boot. What an inspiration to creationists everywhere, forget those silly commandments and 'moral' behavior.

That's a great find. Thanks for the heads up. Just one more glimpse into the lack of ethics within the creationist leadership.

Even you Richard.

We believe you can be saved from the appalling blinkers of Christianity and put on the path to trusting your senses.

__________________
A scientist, it's official

" The result, therefore, of this physical enquiry is that we find no vestige of a beginning, no prospect of an end" James Hutton, from his 1788 paper to the Royal Society of Edinburgh on the principles of geology

The REAL shame of creationism: its fradulent spokemen.

At one time I believed that everyone was responsible for their own actions, I have since been persuaded otherwise,
some people just can not think for themselves, their upbringing will not allow it,
if they were told by their parents something was true, for them it's true and always will be, no question.

So to say the spokesmen are at fault I don't think is quite true, some of them must believe what they are saying,
unless of course they are obviously only in it for the money, like Hovind, a real shyster,
if someone like that can get hold of people, the damage he can do is immense.

The problem I think stems from the people who want to believe, their need is so great they will believe anything FOR their belief,
and reject everything AGAINST, blindly, if an obvious idiot told them something, they would believe it without question,
because it's what they want to hear, and if the President stood up and said it was untrue they would not believe him,
because it's not what they want to hear.

It ends up at a point where the truth is irrelevant, the argument is either for or against, if it's for, believe it, if it's against, reject it,
no matter how stupid or ridiculous that argument is,
that is the only way to understand why people will believe the obvious liars out there, what other reason can there be?
in fact reason has been abandoned altogether.

And "scientists" don't?

__________________