Looking for "cutting-edge research that demonstrates the young earth model, the global Flood, the non-evolutionary origin of the species, and other evidences that correlate to the biblical accounts"? The ICR has launched the International Journal of Creation - "a professional peer-reviewed journal of interdisciplinary scientific research that presents evidence for recent creation within a biblical framework." It's
edited by Andrew Snelling ... who hasn't himself published in a mainstream journal since 1987, so I guess "professional" means "Bible-believing".
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Answers in Genesis, fresh from their success at aping real science with their fake "Museum," has a new dishonest enterprise in the works: they're starting a fake science journal, the Answers Research Journal, which will publish "cutting-edge research that demonstrates the validity of the young-…
Slate has the goods on the style manual for Answers Research Journal, which is "a professional, peer-reviewed technical journal for the publication of interdisciplinary scientific and other relevant research from the perspective of the recent Creation and the global Flood within a biblical…
Want to publish something? Worried that you don't actually have a lab or an opportunity to do real research? Never fear, the Institute for Creation Research has put out a call for papers, and anyone can get published there! (Well, just about anyone. I doubt that anything I submitted under my name…
So, Answers in Genesis cranked out the first issue of its new journal, and with all deliberate speed! It's remarkable. I'm guessing that creation research doesn't take quite as long as, say, real science. The pilot issue is a true testament to the idiocy of the Creation Cult. I guess we have to…
"cutting-edge research that demonstrates the young earth model, the global Flood, the non-evolutionary origin of the species, and other evidences that correlate to the biblical accounts"
Cutting-edge research, like making new stuff up, or cutting-edge research like the Grand Canyon was caused by The Flood?
I guess "professional" means "Bible-believing".
And the value of "peer-reviewed" depends on who your peers are. If your peers are a bunch of anti-science Biblical literalists...
When I was a toddler and the big boys wouldn't let me play baseball with them, I'd gather up my toddler peers and we would play our own game. Nyah, nyah! The real challenge will be for them to produce research results that other workers will find useful.
Cutting-edge research, like making new stuff up, or cutting-edge research like the Grand Canyon was caused by The Flood?
Cutting-edge research like cutting into the brie at the buffet table at all of these "sciency conferences" funded by fundy dollars, and cutting-the-cheese in the bathroom afterward after drinking themselves stinking and screaming at the waitstaff.
Man, sign me up. ;-)
So it is pew- or phew-reviewed? Discuss.
Either way, it stinks.
Polonium haloes! All polonium haloes, all the time. All other evidence falls away as irrelevant when one considers polonium haloes. All science to the contrary is blown away by the mighty hurricane of Truth that is polonium haloes.
Therefore, Darwin was Wrong.
So, it's a journal explicitly dedicated to, among other things, confirmation bias. You'd think they'd at least *pretend* to be interested in negative evidence as well, to maintain at least a whiff of sciencyness.
Bible study session = Peer review?
Quite the culture-jamming opportunity. I'm quite tempted churn out a Sokal-style pseudoscript. Something like "Asexual Fruit Production on the Third Day: God's Shadow as the First Critical Dark Period Inducer?" or "A New Mechanism for Sheol/Firmament Thermocycling" or "Making Men In Our Image: Does Design by Committe Explain Male Nipples and Wisdom Teeth?" On second thought, I'm not going to touch that merde with a ten-cubit pole.