Finally, a That’s a Fact video that’s more creationism than theology. Indeed, it’s about the most famous of creationist canards – namely, that the Grand Canyon. Or rather, something they call the “Little Grand Canyon“:
(I’m not actually sure why that is working, considering that the previous one still wont display. The ICR is weird.) Continue reading →
The That’s a Fact video series from the ICR has returned after a short absence. The first video for 2012 is Science in Scripture. If this year is anything like the last, the video should appear below by the end of the week. In the meantime, watch the first of Dr Shorey’s videos on the ICR here. It’s much better than the ICR’s own ones, trust me.
I’m getting the impression that the That’s a Fact series is now reduced to just reusing old ICR material and reformatting it for video consumption. This current video – Isaac Newton – is seemingly taken from an old Acts & Facts series, Man of Science, Man of God. As you can probably already guess, the series is based around the idea that they have all these famous scientists who were religious. For the video series at least they have started with Newton – in my opinion this was not a very good choice.
(They’ve managed to find a way to prevent me embedding the videos, the bastards – however other videos on other posts seem to be still working. Hence I have put the video below anyway in the hope that this is only temporary. You can see the video on their site here regardless. Depending on how they’ve done it, it may be viewable below on feed readers. [Edit: Nope, but that raises my hopes that it will have to be lifted for Rhonda Forlow to be able to use it.] [Edit 2: It works now])
Before I begin it is worth pointing out that commenting on the videos has resumed, and Dr Shorey is back commenting on them again, like so:
Glad to see the ICR put comments back up. Also glad to see a completely factual “That’s a Fact”. I don’t see what point being made is though. Newton definitely believed the Bible was the word of God and wrestled with the oddities. Newton was also a really unpleasant undividual socially, did very mean things to Leibniz, stuck needles in his eye socket so see how it affected his vision, and his comment about the initial motion of the planets was destroyed by Kant and Le Place. Kant qualitatively, and Le Place quantitatively pointed out that you don’t need to worry about initial starting of planetary motion when you apply Newtonian physics to a concept known as the Nebular Hypothesis. Newton actually destroyed the idea that you needed angels to push the planets around, and Kant killed the idea that you needed supernatural forces to start the planets’ motions off to begin with. We can also note that Newton’s ideas of space as a stage on which we walk, and time as a river that runs along side us was superceded by Einstein’s ideas of relativity which conceives of us all being temporally and spatially extended, and Einstien definitely said he was an atheist. Gee. argument from scientific authority doesn’t work for anyone. So what is the point here? Look we have one on our side and ignore all the scientists who aren’t on the side of creationism? I call this cherry piking the data set of scientists. My final assessment is this is misleading work by the ICR that violates the 9th commandment, again.
There isn’t all that much to add to Shorey’s comment, but I’ll do so anyway: Continue reading →
It seems I need to get around to part 2 of Neural Nets. I wrote that post in response to the DpSU IBM Attempts to Build Computer ‘Brain’ back at the end of August, and said that I would make a part two. This isn’t it, but the most recent edition of the ICR’s That’s a Fact video channel – Imitating Humans – is on the same subject:
This being, then, the promised brief update to the situation reported on in Spam and Censorship the other day.
To recap, Christian Shorey – a geologist from the Colorado School of Mines, who appears to indeed be a Christian but not a young-Earth creationist like the powers that be on the Science Essentials site – has been posting comments pointing out some of the places where the site’s author, Rhonda Forlow, has got it wrong. He was being quite polite and reasonable, but nevertheless one of his postings went missing. Where we left off last time he had just complained about this fact, suspecting censorship.
And then there’s the spam. The comment sections of the Science Essentials site are riddled with unsubtle spam. Indeed, what it surprisingly lacks is genuinely subtle spam, where the spammers make up a name rather than call themselves “download music to my phone.” I documented an example of Dr Forlow responding to one such spam comment as if it’s flattering comments were the real thing, and it wasn’t the only one of its kind either… Continue reading →
Do you remember Dr Shorey? You know, the geologist from the Colorado School of Mines that was commenting on the Science Education Essentials blog from a critical, but polite, perspective. Well, he’s being censored: