From:    James J. Lippard
To:      All                                    Msg #92, Jul-13-93 03:28PM
Subject: hilarious hypocrisy by Henry Morris

Organization: University of Arizona
From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard)
Message-ID: <13JUL199316282263@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.origins

Every so often I've been putting in a little bit of work on my
detailed critique of Gish's _Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics_.
So far I have taken four single-spaced pages to address the errors
and distortions on pages iv to vi of Henry Morris's introduction to
the book.  Morris makes such claims as that Gish has won every debate
he's ever been in (of the five I've seen or read transcripts of, he
was the clear winner once, the clear loser three times, and once was
a draw), that there is *no* evidence for evolution (though he goes
on to list some), that Gish is "a man of high integrity ... and
deep dedication to truth," and other blatant falsehoods.  But the
following paragraph has got to be one of the most hypocritical things
I have ever read:

     Most of the anti-creationist books and articles take essentially
     the same approach.  That is, they are anti-creationist more than
     pro-evolutionist.  Most of them repeat the same anti-creationist
     polemics that others have used, making the same unwarranted
     accusations, again and again.

This from the author of _Scientific Creationism_, which in its 17th
printing (and probably several more by now) has yet to correct such
things as his ridiculous population growth and element residence time
arguments for a young earth.  (And it's not like there isn't an
enormous literature of pro-evolution literature out there.  But
where's the theory of creationism and its evidence?)

Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Dept. of Philosophy      Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721