I'm all for concentrating the stupid in one place

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.

More like this

That loon Terry Hurlbut is irate that I mocked his "Creationist Hall of Fame" in a post the other day, so he rails against me today. It's a typical collection of squirrely non-sequiturs, but I'll address the funniest of them. But what PZ Myers of the Pharyngula blog fails to understand is that the…
This week, the creationist Ken Ham and his organization, Answers in Genesis, are practicing the Big Lie. They have spent tens of millions of dollars to create a glossy simulacrum of a museum, a slick imitation of a scientific enterprise veneered over long disproved religious fables, and they are…
The Creation Museum is located in northern Kentucky, just across the Ohio border from Cincinnati. Answers in Genesis, the folks behind the so-called "museum", claim that their "museum" is within a 6 hour drive of 2/3 of the US population. This is not true -- Kentucky is in the middle of bumfuck…
I'm warning you. It's a disaster waiting to build: when the newspapers start reporting creationist versions of stories without questioning them, without providing explanations of the fallacies, and without even bringing in authoritative scientific voices to knock their claims down, all you do is…

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.

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.

Open challenge

GPS.

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.

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 29 Aug 2012 #permalink

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
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Sarfatti

By Jack Sarfatti (not verified) on 30 Aug 2012 #permalink

To cite a newspaper headline...

"JACKO[,] YOU FOOL"

Go here.

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 30 Aug 2012 #permalink

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.

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 31 Aug 2012 #permalink

NEITHER WORKS

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

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 01 Sep 2012 #permalink

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 www.indjst.org (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 www.elixirjournal.org. 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 www.indjst.org.

By WhiteHatLurker (not verified) on 01 Sep 2012 #permalink

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.

http://vixra.org/abs/1201.0032

Tell me more, WhiteHatLurker.

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

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!

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 02 Sep 2012 #permalink