Terry Mortenson’s Creationist Claims! (Updated)

Some local churches from my lovely small college town of Morris, MN held an Answers in Genesis conference this past weekend. By “conference,” I mean they had a single speaker, Terry Mortenson, give 7 lectures over the course of 2 days. The second day has yet to begin, but here is a running list of the claims he has made thus far.

His two talks tonight were “Dinosaurs: Have We Been Brainwashed?” and “Noah`s Flood: Washing Away Millions of Years.” The dinosaur one was more sad and pathetic than anything. It depresses me that this guy was killing the wonder of dinosaurs for dozens of children – dinosaurs are the reason I have lived a life of biological curiosity! I truly fear these children will never benefit from their wonder; it’s downright evil. The flood one was more infuriating, however – by the end he was basically attacking all working scientists and calling them liars and frauds: most fossils are fake, they cherry pick radiometric dates, and they have an anti-Biblical agenda because they don’t assume the Bible is literal truth. He resorted to anti-intellectualism and anti-education propaganda. The guy is a fucker.

Anyway, here is what I compiled as his claims. Each claim with a XX### is from the Index of Creationist Claims. The bracketed sentences are my own comments and additions. The end of the list includes claims that he made that are unfortunately not in the index. I will update this tomorrow night after his last two talks.

Note that you can also check out the Twitter hashtag PZ and I used, #creoass!

CA001. Evolution is the foundation of an immoral worldview.
CA010. Homosexuality receives approval from evolutionists.
CA113. Quote mining
CA114. Many famous scientists were creationists. [He actually flips this – accuses Lyell and other geologists of being “secret atheists.”]
CA120. An evolved mind is fallible, its conclusions untrustworthy.
CA221. Were you there?
CA250. Scientific findings are always changing.
CA310. Scientists find what they expect to find.
CA602.2. Scientists aim to make God unnecessary.
CA620. If man comes from random causes, life has no purpose or meaning.
CB930.3. Dinosaurs may still be alive in the Congo. (insinuated)
CC214.1.1. Archaeopteryx is fully bird
CC310. Fossils are dated from strata; strata are dated from fossils.
CC352. Archaeoraptor was a fake. [Also produced by a Chinese fossil factory!]
CC361. Fossils can form quickly. [His whole spiel regarding fossil formation was meandering and confusing.]
CC362. Large collections of fossils indicate catastrophism.
CC371. Evidence of blood in a Tyrannosaurus bone indicates recent burial.
CD000: Radiometric dating makes false assumptions
CD001. Radiometric dating falsely assumes rocks are closed systems.
CD002. Radiometric dating falsely assumes initial conditions are known.
Radiometric dating assumes constant rates of decay.
CD011.6. Ancient coal and oil are C-14 dated as only 50,000 years old.
CD013. K-Ar dating gives inaccurate results for modern volcanic rocks.
CD020. Consistency of radiometric dating comes from selective reporting.
CD200. Uniformitarian assumption is untenable.
[Catastrophism was restored by Derek Ager after 150 year of uniformitarian “brainwashing.”]
[Evolution and uniformitarianism “not the result of research, but of anti-Biblical assumptions.”]

CH001. Creationism has explanatory power.
CH010. Creationism, being Bible-based, is good.
CH030. God is all-good. (does not lie)
CH050. Genesis is foundational to the Bible.
CH055. Non-creationist Christians are compromisers.
CH100. The Bible says it; I believe it; that settles it.
CH100.1. Science must be interpreted in light of scripture.
CH101. The Bible is inerrant.
CH102. The Bible is literal.
CH102.5. God’s promise of no more floods fails if Noah’s flood was local.
CH103. Bible claims inspiration.
CH120. The Bible must be accurate because archeology supports it.
CH200. The universe is 6,000-10,000 years old.
CH210. The earth is 6,000-10,000 years old.
CH301. There was no death or decay before the Fall.
CH501. We can expect to find Noah’s ark on Mount Ararat. [Actually said this is not true, Bible says “mountains” not “mountain.” In same range.]
CH512.1. Juveniles of large animals were taken aboard.
CH512.2. The average land animal is the size of a sheep.
CH542. Plants could have survived the Flood. [Specifically olive trees.]
CH570. High mountains were raised during the Flood.
CH710. Man and dinosaurs coexisted.
CH710.2. Dinosaur figurines from Acambaro show a human-dinosaur association. [Something similar, but with Aborigone drawing and engraving of Stegosaur in Angkor Thom]
CH711. Behemoth, from the book of Job, was a dinosaur.
CH711.1. Leviathan, from the book of Job, was a dinosaur.
[Also flying serpents existed.]
CH712. Dragons were dinosaurs.
CH712.1. Some dinosaurs breathed fire. [Not preposterous, as electric eels, bombardier beetles, and fireflies create “elements” too!]
T-rex was a vegetarian until the Fall. This makes sense – fructivorous bats have canines too!

Others not in ICC:
– “Birds are birds; dinosaurs are dinosaurs.” Essentialism.
– Scales and feathers are not homologous. [Look at this microscopic picture of a scale and a feather! Totally different! *general laughter*]
– How could a two-way lung system (reptile) evolve into a one-way system (bird)? I think this is what he said anyway.
– The theories of flight evolution are untenable. Ground to air would require millions of years of running until feathers frayed. Air to ground is too complex – have to account for aerodynamics, gravity, and wind patterns. “Keep warm” theory doesn’t work for some reason.
– To evolve birds, dinosaurs would need to shrink. (Later says that most dinosaurs were small anyway…)
– Early dinosaur tree is uncertain. If we remove the uncertainties, it looks like all reptile families were independently created.
– “Dinosaur” doesn’t appear in King James Bible because “dinosaur” was not invented yet. Instead, dragons!
Wollemi Pine – thought it went extinct 65mya, found again. Placard says it is “equivalent of finding a small dinosaur living today.” Why can’t dinosaurs still exist?
– “I’m a mental midget.”
– Scientists are disingenuous liars. We renew textbooks every year because of mistakes so we are wrong about everything.

Update!: Terry Mortenson, Night 2
Tonight was far worse than last night’s. The two talks were “Origin of Species: Was Darwin Right?” and “Ape-men: the Grand Illusion.” His misrepresentations of evolution were absolutely perverse and his attacks on scientists infuriating. The frequent quote-mining of SJ Gould was particularly troubling. I will just post the arguments he made here. Again, those without XX### are ones that did not appear on the Creationist Claims Index and are adapted from PZ’s tweets and my tweets. Bolded ones are my particular favorites. I will try to post an actual reaction sometime tomorrow.

CA001. Evolution is the foundation of an immoral worldview.
CA005. Evolution is racist.
CA005.1. Darwin himself was racist.
CA006.1. Hitler based his views on Darwinism.
CA009. Evolution teaches that we are animals and to behave as such.
CA100. Argument from incredulity
CA112. Many scientists find problems with evolution.
CA120. An evolved mind is fallible, its conclusions untrustworthy.
CA202. Evolution has not been proved.
CA230.1. Evolutionists interpret evidence on the basis of their preconceptions.
CA301. Science is naturalistic. (see also CA601: Methodological naturalism)
CA301.1. Naturalistic science will miss a supernatural explanation.
CA520. The Origin of Species does not address speciation.
CA620. If man comes from random causes, life has no purpose or meaning.
CA630. Animals are not moral, aesthetic, idealistic, or religious.
CB010. The odds of life forming are incredibly small.
CB010.1. Even the simplest life is incredibly complex.
CB010.2. First cells could not come together by chance.
CB025. Not all amino acids needed for life have been formed experimentally.
CB100. Mutations are rare.
CB101. Most mutations are harmful.
CB101.1. Mutations are accidents; things do not get built by accident.
CB101.2. Mutations do not produce new features.
CB102. Mutations do not add information.
CB110. Microevolution selects only existing variation.
CB180. The genetic code is a language.
[He compared DNA to a string of lettered beads – then argument from design.]
CB601.2. Peppered moths occur in uncamouflaged colors in many areas.
CB601.2.1. Dark moths never completely replaced light ones in Manchester.
CB822. Evolution’s tree-like pattern is discredited.
CB901. Macroevolution has never been observed.
CB901.1. Range of variation is limited within kinds.
CB901.2. No new phyla, classes, or orders have appeared.
CB901.3. Darwin’s finches show only microevolution.
CB902. Microevolution is distinct from macroevolution.
CB910.1. Fruit fly experiments produce only fruit flies.
CB910.2. Peppered moths remained the same species.
CB920. No new body parts have evolved.
CB928. Why are beneficial traits not evolved more often?
CB932. Some modern species are apparently degenerate, not higher forms.
CC000-CC049: Questionable fossils
CC000: Specific hominid fossils were hoaxed
CC001. Piltdown man was a hoax.
CC001.1. Piltdown man was the subject of 500 doctoral dissertations.
CC002. Nebraska man was a hoax.
CC040. Anthropologists disagree.
CC041. Homo habilis is an invalid taxon.
CC050. All hominid fossils are fully human or fully ape.
CC080. Australopithecus was fully ape, closer to chimp.
CC202. Transitional fossils do not show direct ancestry.
CC401. Paleontologists reconstruct an entire animal from a single bone.
CF001. The second law of thermodynamics prohibits evolution.
CF001.1. Systems left to themselves invariably tend toward disorder.
CF001.2. The second law of thermodynamics, and the trend to disorder, is universal.
CF001.3. Instructions are necessary to produce order.
CF001.4. The second law is about organized complexity, not entropy.
CF003. How could information, such as in DNA, assemble itself?
CF005. 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to information theory.
CG030. Oldest structures, such as pyramid
CH100. The Bible says it; I believe it; that settles it.
CH100.1. Science must be interpreted in light of scripture.
CH101. The Bible is inerrant.
CH200. The universe is 6,000-10,000 years old.
CH210. The earth is 6,000-10,000 years old.
CH350. Organisms come in discrete kinds.
CI101. Complexity indicates design.

– “It’s progress when you admit the things you knew were false.”
Evolution is inherently racist, while the Bible is not. It says god made everyone from one pair.
Scientists admit the human evolutionary tree has gotten more complex in recent years. Therefore, humans didn’t evolve.
Argument from Bad Reconstructions. Showing ugly drawings & quoting newspapers. Therefore, humans didn’t evolve.
– How artists drew Neanderthals in magazines has changed! Evolution is false.
Evolutionists think Aborigines & Neanderthals were “subhuman”.
– Richard Leakey admitted he was wrong about something. Therefore evolution is false.
– Some evolutionists say Lucy was a knuckle walker.
– Neanderthal & Homo erectus are human beings! All those other hominins? Those are apes.
Larry Krauss: forget Jesus, stars died to create you. [Mortenson proceeded to make fun of this idea and the audience chuckled at the idea that we are stardust. It was a disgusting and depressing moment.]
– Mutations are caused by sin. They’re god’s curse.
– H. pylori lost information to become resistant to antibiotic. What about Lenski’s citrate experiment?
– Mutations NEVER increase genetic information. Who knew?
– “Natural selection is the god-designed method of preserving kinds”
– Now he’s reciting fish to frogs to man evolution.
– Same crap as last night! Biblical glasses vs. Naturalistic glasses. [This was a major argument of his. Scientists and Creationists start from different assumptions. We know Bible is right so that is the only proper assumption one can make, not philosophical naturalism.]
– Evolution says time+chance+laws of nature created everything. He ‘rebuts’ this by quoting the bible.
– “Evolution says your great-great-great grandpa was pond scum.”
– Evolution says we are only beholden to the law of the jungle.
– No one is black. “if you look closely, they are actually dark brown.” [Just a stupid comment of his]
Evolution is racist. Scientists say the Anglo-Saxons are the most evolved.
Neanderthals were 100% human. They had culture and hunted seals.
Lazarus was buried in a cave. Lot lived in one in a while. Hence the Bible does talk about cavemen!
Lucy exhibit has the wrong toe length. No one knows how to reconstruct human ancestors.
If humans have no rights and it’s okay to experiment on mice, then we can experiment on humans, right? Hitler thought so.
– Selection is fact, mutation is fact, evolution is not.
The dogs from the ark would have had enormous genetic diversity.
– Chihuahuas have less information than a Great Dane.
– Only two mechanisms of evolution: natural selection and random mutation.
– “How did stupid atoms spontaneously write their own software?”
“Deoxyribonucleic acid” is too hard to remember. “Definitely No Accident” is easier.
– He is conflating DNA with lettered beads on a thread.
– Sandcastle analogy instead of watchmaker. Focus here is the amount of information being conveyed by the sandcastle, not intricate mechanics.
It isn’t the tree of life, it’s the forest of creation.
– Scientists lead you to believe that evolution = natural selection.
The Grants didn’t detect any directional change or evolution on the finches.
– Dogs don’t evolve. They just beget other dogs.
Evolution is the microbe to microbiologist theory of life.

Two really stupid things below:
A friend was checking out the creationist books and asked for the most scientifically rigorous book offered. The seller offered some lame book (of course) but he had some questions for her to ask professors.

1) Chemical signals are too slow to transmit information through the body. So cells must have “cellular e-mail.” How could that evolve?
2) If I shoot you with a bullet, why do you suddenly die?

I will leave you to ponder those questions! :)

51 thoughts on “Terry Mortenson’s Creationist Claims! (Updated)

  1. Thanks for the rundown of insanity.
    It is truely sad that so many people have no idea how rediculous these claims are. And so many people buy into the nonsense.
    I am glad I didn’t make it to the talks, I would have gotten arested perhaps.
    Thanks again for the time and effort you have taken to let me and others know about this.
    If I was the Professor I would give you the grade you earned.


  2. Sometimes you wonder if he reads his lectures back to himself and is able to see his own contradictory statements. That’s before you even get into pointing out the issues with using the Bible as a basis for understanding anything.

    The mind boggles, it honestly does.


  3. I’ve been following PZ’s live tweets about the dinosaur seminar last night, giving me the opportunity to invite people to my Stupid Dinosaur Lies Debunked site which contains rebuttals to all those stupid, idiotic dinosaur claims heard last night at the seminar. Here. I’ll share the link to my site with you and your readers so that they can come visit my site and read all those rebuttals to every creationist dinosaur claim known.



  4. This is about as bad as I’ve seen, and I’ve attended one of Kent Hovind’s performances (before he got hauled off to be a guest of the state, of course).

    The question I’d really like to ask in response to arguments like the one about feathers fraying after millions of years of running is, “Do you really think evolutionary biologists are that stupid? No, seriously, do you really think they’re complete and utter morons?”

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Nonsense as defined by whom?…you? It’s comforting to know that the only ‘critical thinkers’ are at our local university. Whew!! I feel much better already.


    • Nonsense as defined by the scientific method and any measure of critical thinking I’m aware of.
      Having said that, your Bible fails on every count. Inerrant my foot!


  6. Jen,

    Nonsense as defined by a logical analysis of the claim against the evidence. Educate yourself in the evidence and you can play along too!


  7. You certainly have my respect for sitting through all of that without losing your mind. I sat through one by Jonathan Sarfati and that was enough for me. The highlights were “how can fish form fossils if they float after they die?”, “If life can form spontaneously why doesn’t it happen in a can of soup?”


  8. Very nice article Kele!
    I’m speechless. I hope people know that if they can’t afford a formal education, or just don’t have one, there are such things as PUBLIC libraries. There is no excuse for this sort of foolish thought. The wealth of good information out there is vast. It’s sad that it’s the 21st century and people like Terry Mortensen believe what they say is true. It’s crap…..


  9. Mutations NEVER increase genetic information.

    My favorite consequence of this rule is that if you have a point mutation that changes, say, AGC to AGT, that’s a decrease in information. And if you have another mutation that changes AGT back to AGC, that’s also a decrease in information.

    I guess for creationists, information runs along Escher’s endlessly-descending staircase.


  10. “Lazarus was buried in a cave. Lot lived in one in a while. Hence the Bible does talk about cavemen!”

    I just had to apologize to my colleges about the splutter and heaves of laughter that apparently came from my workstation. Friggin’ hell, these people have issues.


  11. Kele,
    Thanks for the information on Mortensen’s so-called lectures. It’s always a good idea to know what your enemy is thinking. Make no mistake about it, these people ARE the enemy. I know it’s difficult coming to the realization that one’s own countrymen are considered the enemy, but as you have just seen demonstrated, they will do anything and say anything to spread their spiritual addiction. Worse, they’re targeting young children with this crap.

    My advice to you, student Kele, is to let the graybeards like P.Z. and I wage the battle of words with these sinister god-zombies (“gombies” if you will), while you study your damn ass off and be as good an evolutionary biologist as you can be. Perhaps then using your research we can finally toss these fucking con-men onto the ash heaps of history where they belong.

    I am gratified to see that you are with us in this war against ignorance. I wish you all the best in what will be–I am sure–the time of your life.

    Yours in science,

    Tulsa, OK

    Liked by 1 person

    • Neil,
      My Mom taught me when a person resorts to profanity it’s demonstrates a lack of upbringing and command of our language. It doesn’t make you look cool and hip.


  12. I live near Drumheller, Alberta, which is home to the Royal Tyrrell Museum, which has some of the best dinosaur collections in the world. Sadly, to the north in the beautiful community of Big Valley (which has a grain eleavtor museum, remains of a Canadian Northern Railroad roundhouse and other attractions sits a hemorrhoid called the “Big Valley Creationist Museum” which is a laughable travesty at best. This fracking idiot would fit in that place nicely. Nice thing is, the town is not to pleased having that place in town, since it is a travesty to science and fact.

    I’m amazed PZ sat thru this thing without getting sick from all of the total bullshit!! (I barely made it thru without my head exploding!


  13. Terry, Thanks for the report. I was just on a Christian blog. i tried to ask reasonable questions and I was shunned. That is wha the Bible teaches. It is sad. After talking to a few before i was shunned I realized they honestly believe in the Bible. It is so sad. However, what I recognized very soon from them is once someone accepts certain data as fact any other data that contradicts that data is considered a lie. The unfortunate thing is since they were taught creationism from childhood and their families believe it they are stuck and will fight and promote thier mythology till the day they die most probably. Check out my book Holy Bible Christianity and Science Chronology. It places the Bible in atimeline with science. It really makes the Bible look stupid said one of its readers. It makes mythology look like mythology on more levels than just Genesis verses evolution. It will help those who are not totally committed to creationism to accept archaeology and evolution. Keep your head up. Science will slowly win. I converted from orthodox Cchristianity to believein evolution and science so it can be done. J. L. Horner


  14. Someone should have locked the doors of the room and hijacked the lecture afterwards to explain why this is all rubbish. A nice quiet simple step by step explanation of the mistakes and bloody lies this retard presented. Asking each member of the audience if they really understand the explanation before moving on to the next idiot statement. I am allowed to dream, no?

    Liked by 1 person

  15. He claims “An evolved mind is fallible, its conclusions untrustworthy.”
    His conclusions are quite obviously untrustworthy
    Therefore Terry Mortenson has an evolved mind
    Therefore he has proved evolution is true.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. I can’t stand this “evolution preaches racism/animal behaviour/murder/etc” nonsense. It speaks volumes about the mindset that these sad individuals share: They WANT to be told how to live. They DON’T WANT to think for themselves. The idea that evolutionary theory tells us how it IS, and not how it SHOULD be, confuses them to no end. “I mean, what’s the point? It doesn’t tell me how to live my life or anything! Or does it ..? If it does, then obviously it’s telling me to behave like an animal and kill everybody who doesn’t look like me! EVIL!”. Dimwits.


  17. On the “Mutations never increase information” argument it is essentially the same as the contention that entropy means information is lost. This is the reverse of the case as much physics now seems to accept that definitions of entropy from information science. This in turn means that information in a system increases as entropy increases.

    Or am I wrong?


    • I don’t know if you’re wrong or not, but I do know that the second law of thermodynamics does not suggest that entropy must increase everywhere all of the time, which is how creationists would like it to be understood. It only applies to isolated systems. The earth, and the lifeforms upon it, are not isolated systems as they have a constant input of energy from the sun.
      Basically they claim that life on earth is like a massive perpetual motion machine that can only wind down, while ignoring the massive battery that it’s hooked up to.
      So since entropy is not necessarily increasing in the systems we’re discussing, does it matter whether or not information increases as entropy increases?


  18. Just had to “Chirp” in on the picture you decided to post with this blog. Find it increadibly funny that you placed it there to mock creationists when it’s the evolutionists that claim that bird’s evolved from dinosaurs. You people crack me up!


    • It’s there because creatards believe that transitional fossils MUST take the form of half one animal-half another animal. They don’t accept that every living thing there ever was is a transitional.
      Thank you for playing.


  19. Thanks for compiling that! Hope you don’t mind I saved a copy. I’ve never seen a denser pile of creationist BS stacked in such a small space! I read it fast though, hoping for no permanent damage to my laptop from displaying it!


  20. I was dragged to these things as a child a couple of times, and my parents still go from time to time. Dad has a number of the books and they subscribe to the AiG magazine.

    Rest assured, it is possible to be brought up being taught this crap and see that it is 100% untrue. It isn’t easy, and it may not be likely, but it is possible. I know, I did. As a kid and a teen I struggled to make the things I knew to be true mess with the things my parents, the church, and Ken Ham were trying to teach me were true. I couldn’t do it, and that eventually was one of the big issues that caused me to stop believing.

    It pisses me off that these people dupe so many people into believing their illogical lies. It pisses me off even more that they try to force children to believe their crap.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Jeezz… Thanks for sitting thru this drivel. Amazing that someone who lives in the 21st century can cling so tenaciously to 2000 year old myths… when most of the evidence admitting it fallacy is right at hand!

    I wouldn’t have made it through the talks.


  22. “It pisses me off that these people dupe so many people into believing their illogical lies. It pisses me off even more that they try to force children to believe their crap.”

    What happens if 100 years from now you had it all wrong and they had it right who’s forcing crap on people then, do you change your mind when the pendulum swings back, or do you continue in our belief and become the outcast?


    • I’ve heard this argument before. What you don’t seem to understand is that a rejection of evolution and the true age of the earth (and universe) is also a rejection of all the basic findings of geology, physics, chemistry and biology. The ONLY way that it could be shown that evolution is completely false and creationism is completely true, is if everybody in every field of geology, physics, chemistry and biology has everything completely wrong. I find that to be highly unlikely–mainly because it’s advances in those fields that have allowed us things like: space exploration, computers, gps, modern medicine, ability to accurately predict where underground reservoirs of oil/gas/water should be found, predicting earthquakes/tsunamis/weather/climate change. None of those things would be possible if our understanding of geology, physics, chemistry and biology were based on falsehoods (which they would have to be if creationists’ claims were true).

      So no, I don’t think there’s a chance that in the future we will find out that creationists had it right and evolution is false. More than likely though, by that time there will be a new synthesis of evolution which explains the diversity of life on the planet even better than the current theory does. Much like Einstein built upon Newton’s theories to better explain physic.


      • I think you have a good point about how theories work that many people just don’t get. It is possible to have a good theory and yet have it still be incomplete. As far as I know, there are very few if any theories that have popped up complete and without problems. That does not necessarilly mean that the theory is wrong. The fact of evolution has been proved beyond the shadow of a doubt because this is what the evidence shows. Are there minor disagreements on the details of how that happened? Of course. But that doesn’t invalidate the theory one iota. Even though we have Newtonian physics to tell us that gravity exists and is a measurable force, even now we don’t completely understand it. Using creationist arguments we would have to say that gravity cannot exist unless we understand it completely (and it would have to be explained in the bible for it to be true) Otherwise it is just one of those things that God has decided to do, everything falls down and we are not to question why that is. Ugggh! My brain is bleeding…


  23. He resorted to anti-intellectualism and anti-education propaganda. The guy is a fucker.

    LOL.. I think you have captured it quite succinctly. I must appreciate you and PZ for going through all this. Did you guys keep looking at each other throughout the “conference”?


  24. It appears the basic arguments of creationists/ID folks have not changed much in the past hundred years. My children participated in a Vacation Bible School program a decade ago in a small Midwestern town that was advertised as “God’s great creation” but was a platform for teaching creationism. Each day at lunch my children would tell me what they had learned, and I would refute it with both science and scripture as appropriate to their ages. Local church leaders apologized for the program, embarrassed; they too had been misled by the volunteer leaders as to the theme.

    I hope that those of you who are not religious do understand that many of us who are, do not in any way embrace the views (or, for that matter, the manner of presentation) Kele has reported here. It was painful and infuriating ten years ago for persons who claim the same religious name as myself to tell me and the children that we are willfully closing our eyes to the truth and so deserve the damnation we have chosen. It doesn’t feel any better now.

    From Kele’s report: CB101.1 states “Mutations are accidents.” Fascinating. I would have said, “Mutations are creativity.” Which view is really more spiritual (if “religious” has too many negative connotations), more alive, more full of possibility and hope?

    If you’re looking for an opportunity to learn about or experience a different kind of religious expression, come check out Federated Church in Morris, or call me, the interim pastor. And if you missed the screening of the film “Creation” (about Charles Darwin and how religious, scientific, and political pressures along with personal struggles weighed upon him as he wrestled with what to do about publishing his theories) with facilitated civil dialogue afterwards, sponsored by Morris Free Thinkers, Federated Church, Lutheran Campus Ministries and the Newman Center, you missed a grand opportunity to engage the whole spectrum of views on evolution and religion. Let Kele know if you would be interested in a repeat.


  25. Troll harder, Frank. The “what if you’re wrong” argument is old. William Paley even made a better case than Mortensen. As for not understanding the mockery Kele was making with his Tricera-bird, you obviously don’t even have the creationist angle down. It’s never too late to pick up a book. I’d recommend this, this, or learning to be a better troll. I hope this comment was informative.

    Rev.Frost F.C.D

    p.s. Kele deserves a medal for sitting through every lecture.


  26. In my experience theirs allways someone somewhere willing to buy into any old shit in this case it’s Terry Mortenson’s Creationist bullshit. 1 billion people can infact be wrong


  27. http://forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2604&p=25710#p25710 (my post at 11.49 pm GMT on 2 March)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbreligion/NF2213235?thread=8052944&latest=1#lastpost (the BBC removed post 185 because they were apparently concerned about the possibility of ‘defamation’ against Mortenson).

    This is what WAS in message 185 (slightly edited from a series of emails that I have sent to Mortenson and his AiG colleagues since December – ALL of which he has TOTALLY ignored):
    “http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2010/12/11/origins-views-and-the-assemblies-of-god/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KenHam+%28Around+the+World+with+Ken+Ham%29 (Ken Ham but quoting Dr Terry Mortenson)
    “It is not the “findings of science” that seem to contradict “traditional interpretations” of Genesis 1-11”.
    “Science has not found anything that contradicts the straightforward, literal understanding of Genesis, and it is remarkable that a Christian chemist and biologist would say that science has.”
    “Science has not found transitional forms between different kinds of plants and animals, either living or in the fossil record, to support evolutionist claims that all life is descended from a common ancestor…”
    “And science has not found millions of years of time in the rocks or a gas cloud collapsing to form a star.”
    “None of those things has ever been observed by any scientist, so they are not findings of science.”
    “Rather, evolutionary scientists using anti-biblical (naturalistic and uniformitarian) assumptions and imagination have interpreted some of the observations of the natural world (while ignoring other observations) to invent a story about the past …”
    “That these Christians don’t see this absurdity shows that they indeed have been “immersed in [i.e., brainwashed by] the popular media’s representation of science,” which fails to distinguish between operation science and origin science and deceives people by propagating the evolutionists’ “smoke and mirrors” arguments, such as equating natural selection with evolution or discussing beneficial mutations as an explanation for the origin of genetic information.”

    “But more importantly, when they observe things such as tree-rings, red-shift of starlight, thickness or position of rock layers or the fossils in them, and radioactive isotopes used in dating methods, they are using anti-biblical, atheistic, uniformitarian presuppositions (assumptions) to interpret those observations to mean that millions of years of history have elapsed. Without those anti-biblical, atheistic, uniformitarian assumptions, there would be no evidence of millions of years.”
    It is very clear from the linked article – at BP News – that P Z Myers (I’m not really one of his fans) does NOT think that Francis Collins (a real scientist not a creationist Christian) suffers from atheistic presuppositions.
    Mortenson also contradicts himself. He goes on to allege that Collins has been “brainwashed with “smoke and mirrors” evolutionary arguments”. Yet in his preceding paragraphs (including when referring to Derek Ager) Mortenson complains about ‘uniformitarian presuppositions’ that conclude that various geological processes lasted millions of years. But ‘evolutionism’ ACCEPTS that catastrophic, rapid, events sometimes have occurred too – precisely the point that Ager (NOT a creationist) was agreeing to. And which Collins would no doubt agree with too.
    Thus evolutionists do not appear to be ‘brainwashed’ by ‘anti-biblical, atheistic, uniformitarian presuppositions’. But uniformitarianism SHOULD apply in the absence of any scientific evidence to the contrary – and it supports millions of years. Evolutionists (whether atheists or religious) appear simply follow the scientific evidence. Which happens not remotely to support the book of Genesis, when read as ‘science’. The evidence does not need any manipulating to make it refute Genesis; however manipulation (and the addition of a dose of Bible dogma) IS required to make the scientific evidence ‘uphold’ a literal reading of Genesis.
    So who if anyone is brainwashed here?
    Who is making lots of empty assertions?
    ‘For the glory of God’. A God who must approve of sleight of hand. A God who hates natural science and demands ‘”just believe the Bible and reject everything else even if it appears solidly scientific and accurate”.

    Mortenson has never to my knowledge identified anything in Riley Reynold’s article – as quoted in his blog – that was factually incorrect.
    “Truth is determined by carefully weighing the evidence and arguments for and against a truth claim.” Is that how Answers in Genesis determines scientific truth, then?
    “Most people have only been brainwashed with the evolutionary propaganda dished out in the schools, science programs on TV, state and national parks, naturalist history programs, etc.” Mortenson clearly thinks that everyone in the US is rather stupid. (Probably SOME of them are.)
    “Isn’t it interesting that the atheists essentially control the whole public education system in this country (and most other countries) and yet their decades of graduates are apparently so poorly trained in how to think carefully that it is dangerous for them to hear creationist criticisms of evolution because they simply don’t have the mental skills to see through all our “bad, anti-scientific arguments”?” LIAR.
    Riley was not refusing to listen to creationist criticisms – rather he was already familiar with them and in consequence concerned that they might mislead others. Is that too difficult to understand?
    “If the evolutionary view was really the truth, evolutionists wouldn’t be so afraid of creationists…” False argument. Evolutionists, even religious ones, do not want people to be misled about science.
    “Instead they generally resort to ad hominem attacks, gross misrepresentations of what creationists teach, fear tactics and legal threats to try to stop people from hearing and considering the truth.” Such as? Were there any of these in Riley’s article?
    “That alone, without even considering the scientific arguments, should tell any thoughtful person that the evolutionary view must be false.” A sweeping and revealing assertion. And one which rather contradicts “weighing the evidence and arguments for and against a truth claim”. As Answers in Genesis seek to convince people is their normal method of determining truth.
    And it’s not true in my case.

    “A growing body of overwhelming scientific evidence also shows that evolution and millions of years are religiously motivated myths masquerading as scientific fact.”
    Dr Mortenson LYING again.
    Has any of the stuff cited at footnote 39 been submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed science journal I wonder?”

    These are my personal views.


  28. Is it necessary for me to subscribe – as suggested by your email – in order for my comments to appear here or for me to receive a notification of any follow-up comments?
    I’m assuming not.


  29. Wow. That took me half an hour to simply read through your notes. That was an unbearable pile of bull crap! Simply sitting through these lectures impresses me, but the fact that you could take SO many notes without falling out of your seat laughing truly astounds me.

    Well done.


    • While it’s possible (though highkly unlikely) that as we contunue to accumulate new observations evolutionary models may ultimately require such extensive revision we approach a situation where one could reasonably claim “they had it all wrong”, I’m afraid it is not possible we may also find that creationists “had it all right”. The abundant existing evidence is already more than sufficient to demonstrate none of the world’s various creation myths can possibly represent literally accurate accounts of actual historic events.


  30. I believe in divine creation. I recently came across a book by the author you are refuting here; I am simply researching if the book is worth reading. I have never been to a conference of his nor have I heard of him. Therefore, I am NOT defending him or his statements. In beginning to read this blog, the first thing accomplished is to call the man a “fu**er”. This sets the tone for the rebuttal posed here, and frankly there is no desire to continue reading. Name calling is personal attack and serves to invalidate all argument.


  31. I was raised in this shit! So, we know this crap is poisoning our world in an attempt to create a theocracy to bind everyone. The question is how best to fight it? These tyrants are trying to clone each of us in their image, and if we just sit and watch we will suffer their tyranny in time.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s