Nope. Why? Because he knew nothing of evolution. He had no chance to decide it's merits. Therefore, claiming he rejected it or would reject it is impossible.
It does include AiG and ICR, though. And since it's "most", I have learned to check all.
He would be an expert on geology and the age of the earth, not evolution.
Claiming he is a "Scientists rejecting Darwinism" is meaningless, as he's a geologist rejecting geology.
What bearing that would have on evolution would be up to the biologists, not our hypothetical geologist.
I vaguely recall mentioning him in my last post. Did you miss it?
How about AiG's article on Whale evolution? It was covered in this thread. (To an extent. A conversation with Nick is often like pulling teeth).
To sum up, AiG has misleading (very misleading) claims about the Ambulocetus fossil. Among them, that it's 50% complete (missing the key pelvis, in fact) when it is missing only the tip of it's snout and part of it's feet, and that it is "out of order" (they claim it's an early whale, when it fact it's about the middle of the sequence).
Nick, you note, keeps using the AiG depection of the fossil (missing most of it's pieces). At best, they are guilty of the absolute worst scholarship. Given the length of time the piece has been up (both the impact article and the followup), their errors have undoubtably come to their attention, and it is still not fixed. I can't even believe that, because the initial excavatuion (which got the 50% or so of the whale AiG admits exists) was quite clear that the rest of the whale had yet to be excavated.
I would rethink anything tied to whatever assumption you falsified.
Oh, and evolution is a fact and a theory, just like gravity. Good luck trying to erase the fact that dinosaurs used to exist, and don't know, and that humans exist now, and didn't when dinos did.
Yes. It's odd what you find. Bible quotes and evolution bashing. Very strange.
You claimed you had proof of multiple scientists who converted. All that we require is that the scientists be an authority in evolution. Which requires an education, and some sort of history dealing with evolution. A paper, a research project, something.
Your geologist, for instance, would fit nicely if he's rejecting modern geology in favor of young earth geology and has at least worked as a geologist.
If you really want to impress us, find someone who converted to Creationism who isn't a Christian.
Upvote
0
Why don't you do as he says and ask a someone qualitified to talk about the odds of it happening, you'll find something quite interesting.
