REALL 1996 V04N11

Evolution of a Creationist Myth I have noticed, in my time as REALL's chairman, that most creationists often follow similar tactics in their attacks on science. They seem to know they cannot win in the scientific arena, so they take their message directly to the lessinformed public -- often in the f

I have noticed, in my time as REALL's chairman, that most creationists often follow similar tactics in their attacks on science. They seem to know they cannot win in the scientific arena, so they take their message directly to the lessinformed public -- often in the form of "debates" and, increasing

immediately challenged, as would happen if they, for example, tried to submit a scientific paper to a peer-reviewed journal. In a debate, it is possible that their opponent might have the information handy, but no one person can have all the necessary information, and creationists often make claims

checker" for such claims, and there is no opponent who can counter even one erroneous statement immediately. If a reply is published, it often appears one to two weeks later and may not even be seen by some who read the first. Again, there is the problem that correcting an erroneous statement takes

responding to an earlier article about the sun in which there was a statement that the sun is 4.5 billion years old. Hedinger claimed there was no proof to support such this and that it was a "statement of belief." From there, Hedinger launched into a claim that several observatories have been measu

launched into a claim that several observatories have been measuring the sun since 1836 and that they have "established that the radius of the sun has actually been shrinking by about 5 feet per hour." If this were true, and if it had been true since the beginning of the sun's existence (which Hedin