Thinking About Evolution...and Progressive Creation

[Faizal_Ali]

@Puck_Mendelssohn

I would think that they probably have deeply considered the question. Since their only feasible mode of response is to continue to tell lies, and since they are dealing here with an interlocutor who will not let them off the hook if they do, what possible reason could they have to respond?

I don’t think that would explain their lack or response. John, of course, would not let them off the hook. But why would that matter? They’ll just give their usual mendacious and unscientific responses, and their supporters will just lap it up. Have a look at this seemingly interminable discussion for an example of how the typical creationist supporter responds when one of the movement’s supposed scientists is caught out making a series of errors so egregious and basic that mere incompetence cannot possible account for them. (Spoiler alert: The creationist supporter continues to insist the creation “scientist” is correct, regardless).

Nathaniel Jeanson’s Traced

I read Jeanson’s ‘Traced’ It is complete nonsense. One thing that AiG is good at - better than the rest of these creationist ministries - is promotion and marketing. An important thing to remember about someone like Jeanson is he does not have any of the academic freedom typical of a professional scientist. When I debated him about Replacing Darwin I recall at one point I asked about AiGs statement of faith. I was questioning this follow the evidence approach he claimed he was championing given he is contractually obligated to never accept any empirical evidence if it is contrary to a very particular set of Biblical views. His only answer was it was OK because AiG leadership approved the book. This would virtually never happen in academia. I think he also mentioned he makes no royalties off his books. Also not something typical of actual academics. Also people have complained about Jeanson not being responsive to requests for debates. But my experience debating Jeanson was that AiG…

My guess would be that the considered the question cursorily at best, possibly not even to the point of reading the full article, and decided there was no benefit to them in responding. Probably not enough publicity value to make it worth their while.