Do you remember Terry Hurlbut? Of course not. He’s another boring creationist whose schtick is to claim that creationists really are scientists — after all, Isaac Newton was a creationist. He also maintains something called the “Creationist Hall of Fame” which lists a lot of legitimate pre-Darwin thinkers and 20th century crackpots. His “Hall of Fame” is just a website, but he dreams big: he wants to put up a real building with…what? I don’t know. Printouts of his articles?

Anyway, the semi-interesting thing he wants to do is build that edifice to idiocy somewhere near the Creation “Museum”. It’s a legitimate business plan, I think; the concentration of deluded fools spikes in the vicinity of Answers in Genesis, and that’s his market. AiG has nothing to do with it, though — I wonder if they’d resent someone tapping into their pool of suckers? Or if they’d see it as an addition to their vortex of stupid? It depends on Hurlbut’s ideological purity, I suppose.


  1. #1 Adam B
    United States
    August 28, 2012

    I seriously took a Greek class with that guy. His wife passed away a few years ago and I’d assume he’s on a “got nothing to lose” streak at this point. Scary.

  2. #2 NJ
    August 29, 2012

    Not sure what all the anti-creationis rant is these days. Must be a new left wing fad going around.

    Sounds like more fluoride drinking candaian madness to me. Better luck next time my hairy palmed fiends.

  3. #3 Mohammad Shafiq Khan
    August 29, 2012

    Einstein’s all theories have been shown to be incorrect and consequently openly challenged on the basis of published articles. Open challenge is on World Science Database & General Science Journal.

    Open challenge is on​index.php?tab0=Abstracts&tab1=D​isplay&id=6476&tab=2 and also on​Science-Journals/Essays/View/​4018

  4. #4 David Marjanović
    Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin
    August 29, 2012

    Open challenge


    If it wouldn’t take relativity into account, it would be off by several hundred meters.

    Challenge over.

    Also, Einstein arcs, crosses and rings. Google for them.

  5. #5 Jack Sarfatti
    San Francisco
    August 30, 2012

    You sound like a Nazi with The Final Solution for those you consider crazy. Shame on you – another self-hating Jewish Liberal. I don’t buy Creationist’s stuff either but I would not send them to the ovens as you clearly would do if you could with the venom in your writing.
    Jack Sarfatti

  6. #6 David Marjanović
    Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin
    August 30, 2012

    To cite a newspaper headline…


    Go here.

  7. #7 David Marjanović
    Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin
    August 31, 2012

    Hey, Jacko! Where are you! We’ve been mocking you for 69 comments and counting! Come and dance for us!

    You might even learn something about your name in the process.

  8. #8 Peter
    Vancouver, Canada
    August 31, 2012

    After stating “Einstein’s theories have been shown to be incorrect…” Mohammad Shafiq Khan provided two links (presumably to support his claims).​index.php?tab0=Abstracts&tab1=D​isplay&id=6476&tab=2 and​Science-Journals/Essays/View/​4018


  9. #9 David Marjanović
    Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin
    September 1, 2012


    Huh. They did when I wrote my comment. You’re not missing anything, though – both pages just restate the challenge.

  10. #10 WhiteHatLurker
    September 1, 2012

    I had to fight with the links as well, but through one of them I found the text below:

    The article ‘On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies’ by Albert Einstein is based on trickeries is proved beyond any doubt whatsoever in thearticles(1). ‘Experimental & Theoretical Evidences of Fallacy of Space‐time Concept and Actual State of Existence of the Physical Universe’ published in the peerreviewed journal namely Indian Journal of Science & Technology (March 2012 issue) available on (2)‘On the Electrodynamics of
    Moving Bodies By Albert Einstein is Based on Trickeries’ (Open letter to Professors, Teachers, Researchers and Students of Physics) published in peer‐reviewed journal Elixir Online Journal (February 2012 issue) available on The Voigt transformation was simply a mathematical possibility which was changed by Lorentz by introducing the Lorentz factor but the Lorentz factor is simply a manipulation. Thus nature and forces in nature were trivialized and made subservient to mathematics in the theories of relativity, Big Bang Theory, Space‐time concept and in all physical sciences which are directly or indirectly based on the ‘On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies’. It is unfortunate for humanity that exposing these trickeries took more than one hundred years.

    The paper (1) appears to be open for access, I can’t see a DOI for it. I think however that the refutation of relativity would be inconsequential compared with an earlier paper by MSK:
    Mohammad Shafiq Khan (2010b) Foundation of Theory of Everything: Non-living Things & Living Things. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 3(9), 955-981. Available on

  11. #11 cm
    September 2, 2012

    Origin of life and understanding the universe had been the matter of inquisitors to mankind. A new theory is put forward here that could also be called ‘Revitalism’ compared to the vitalism of previous two centuries. So far science has not visualized that besides matter and electromagnetic radiation any other form of ‘energy’ can exist. Now having realized that there could be dark energy which has been proved to be existing (vide ‘energy theory of matter & cosmology’ written by the author in the same issue). Scientists with an open mind look for other forms of ‘energies’ so as to better understand the universe, matter and the life forms. There is an energy which acts as the source of life in different life forms. ‘Soul’ which is also in the form of energy, does not interact directly with the matter or electromagnetic radiation but interacts directly with the ‘energy’ which forms the source of life. So it would be a far more difficult proposition to understand the ‘energy’ which constitutes the ‘soul’. The study of ‘energy’ which forms the source of life is very much possible because it interacts with the matter when in the form of cells. A fresh view of all the life sciences is required so as to have the perfect understanding of phenomenon of life.

    Tell me more, WhiteHatLurker.

  12. #12 cm
    September 2, 2012

    Oh, sorry. Apparently I can’t detect irony. *taps ironometer*

  13. #13 David Marjanović
    Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin
    September 2, 2012

    So far science has not visualized that besides matter and electromagnetic radiation any other form of ‘energy’ can exist.

    LOL! Kinetic energy? Potential energy? What about the forces other than electromagnetism? Over here, such things are taught in secondary school!

New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.