Jonathan Sarfati's "The Greatest Hoax on Earth"

[Hespera]

You guys do realize that AV1611VET has sidetracked my thread. We are no longer discussing Sarfati's book. Regardless, I will acquire the free first chapter and tell you what I think. I might even post segments of it for us to collectively scrutinize.

In fairness to AV, he dangles the bait and its the people who swallow it that derail the thread.

 

[Hespera]

I dunno about that, some of the worst arguments for anything ever have come from the creationist camp. I'd score creationists pretty high when it comes to original ad hoc responses to evidence.

they actually dont have a single data point to share among the lot of them so they have to be kind of creative in making something out of nothing.

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

Fortunally making something out of nothing is the main point of their religion so they learn from the best.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

You guys do realize that AV1611VET has sidetracked my thread. We are no longer discussing Sarfati's book. Regardless, I will acquire the free first chapter and tell you what I think. I might even post segments of it for us to collectively scrutinize.

Richard,

I have not yet read this one but I did read his earlier book Refuting Evolution. That book is full of misinformation, misinterpretation of several fileds of science including geology, paleontology and biology, some deliberate errors of omission to try to make his point and many obvious logical errors. IIRC I wrote a review that said they had missed a big opportunity to join a popular series of books. The should have called it Young Earth Creationism for the Complete Idiot.

(Added in edit:They could have also called it Young Earth Creationism for Dummies I suppose but the most accurate title would have been Young Earth Creationism for the Scientfically Ignorant, Gullilble and Faithful. Anyone with even a bit of science background and ability to apply simple logic will immediately recognize that Refuting Evolution in total nonsense. )

If this new book is anything like his last one I think I will give it a miss. I will try to find time to look at whatever you post but I don't have the time right now.

 

[RichardT]

If this new book is anything like his last one I think I will give it a miss. I will try to find time to look at whatever you post but I don't have the time right now.

Like I said earlier, I have read the first chapter and I really wasn't impressed.

 

[wolfwing]

I've tried reading a few creationists and religious fundementalists books, case for a creator and the homosexual agenda. And have to say that with both it was a real chore to get through them, the just...slander, stupid mistakes, quote mining among other things was hard to get through I admire anyone that can survive any such material andthen critique it.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

It is almost certain that "Socrates" on Theology Web was Sarfati. I haven't posted there for a while so I don't know if he is still around. He was arrogant and obnoxius. He used to refer to Glenn Morton as Glenn Moron until Glenn showed up on the board and totally kicked his a** in several threads. Socrates/Sarfati came across as an all together unpleasant character who could spew out lots of distorted science but couldn't really deal with criticizm from people who knew what they were talking about.

 

[kiwimac]

I remember Socrates from there and had several 'discussions' with him. If that was Sarfati then he had not really changed since he was at Victoria uni in Wellington NZ.

 

[SLP]

So I've read chapter one. Surprisingly it was ever crappier than I had first thought it would be. Do not bother with this book. The entire first chapter goes on about the definition of evolution and how Dawkins supposedly missed-defined it. [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]. It's a polemic game that Sarfati is playing and it's even low for Creationist standards. Evolution occurs in the present is a fact. Evolution has occurred in the past is also a fact based on incredible evidence. It is this evidence that Dawkins has presented, all Sarfati has presented was semantics, and what Sarfati presented was also a false depiction of Dawkins' argument.

Safarti is, indeed, a low life even by professional YEC propagandist standards.
To see him in action, go to Theology Web and search for posts by "Socrates" - Socrates was Sarfati, who showed his true colors, attacking and namecalling even Christians who were not as hard-core YEC as he is.

I have his first book, and it was absolutely horrible. As you indicate, it was nothing but regurgitated hackneyed pablum. Not an original thought in it, but plenty of disinformation, half-truths, etc.

 

[SLP]

It is almost certain that "Socrates" on Theology Web was Sarfati. I haven't posted there for a while so I don't know if he is still around. He was arrogant and obnoxius. He used to refer to Glenn Morton as Glenn Moron until Glenn showed up on the board and totally kicked his a** in several threads. Socrates/Sarfati came across as an all together unpleasant character who could spew out lots of distorted science but couldn't really deal with criticizm from people who knew what they were talking about.

Amazingly, he finally got banned.

Remember how the admins there bent their own rules for Sarfati, stating that it was OK for him to call people names becaus ehe supported his namecalling? So I asked them what evidence he had presented when he referred to me as a clown, and they suspended me for questioning their actions....

And yes, it was Sarfati. Among all of the clues, at one point when he was responding to some of my criticisms of 'Sarfatis' claims, Socrates responded with "I" in his defense.