<body>
Hip and Thigh: Smiting Theological Philistines with a Great Slaughter. Judges 15:8

Friday, July 25, 2008

Creation Terrorists

Annoyed with Charles Johnson's lies against biblical creationists in which he attempts to link them to radical, Islamic terrorism, I shot the folks at the Institute for Creation Research an email inquiring about their take on Johnson's slanders. I received the following:

Dear Fred,

Thank you for contacting ICR. There is no official affiliation of ICR with Harun Yahya (pen name for Adnan Oktar) and/or with the Science Research Foundation (SRF), founded in 1990 by Harun Yahya; nor has there ever been such an official (or unofficial) affiliation.

ICR desires to bring the creation-science message to those who invite its speakers to give the scientific reasons for the authorative account of the Genesis creation, with no political or doctrinal agreements attached. ICR desires to remove the evolution impasse that has kept – and still keeps – millions of souls trapped in this unscientific and religious theory. In fact, ICR seeks to fulfill Christ’s Great Commission in Matthew 28:19-20.

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.”

Although ICR does not have the time to continually champion the cause of creation in such encounters, this does not mean that ICR has ignored such criticism; the ICR staff has responded to critics and have present rebuttals to evolutionist viewpoints and supposed discoveries in current events related to our area of expertise for over three decades. These responses have been posted on ICR's website, in ICR publications, and products.

Nevertheless, it should be obvious to anyone that these anti-creation organizations have been set up to invalidate Genesis and anyone advocating its literal translation. They do not accept Scripture as God's authoritative Word, Genesis as a literal history, or Jesus Christ as God, the Creator.


Along those same lines, the Discovery Institute has published this post answering Johnson,

Little Green Footballs fumbles the Ball...

Johnson owes some apologizes in my opinion.

Labels: ,

7 Comments:

Blogger Escovado said...

Good for you! I was the first "lizard" in the LGF comments section to call Charles and his yes men outright liars over this. There were 500 comments on that thread when I posted my comments--and 2000 when I returned the next day. I didn't bother to read through another 1500 comments. Charles' foaming-at-the-mouth anti-creationism is a continous source of idotic blunders in an otherwise good blog.

5:32 AM, August 28, 2008  
Blogger Diogenes said...

The Institute for Creation Research's response above is not technically incorrect, but it is dishonest, as it fails to mention ICR's well-documented history of working with Harun Yahya's organization, the BAV, aka "Scientific Research Foundation." Harun Yahya published photos on his websites of ICR and BAV people working together to promote the BAV.

My blog post "Creationists Gone Wild! Sex Slavery and Cocaine Cult Leads Fight Against Darwin!" shows in detail that Harun Yahya is a cult leader who practices the sexual enslavement of his female followers (this is well-documented in the Turkish prosecutor's indictment, and other places), and his organization has a long history of promoting intense anti-Semitic hatred and conspiracy theories. He mixes Holocaust denial and evolution denial. His activities in promoting anti-Semitic hate and Holocaust denial were widely publicized by his own organization in the mid-90's, well before the ICR helped promote him and his cult through multiple, joint ICR/BAV creationist conferences in Turkey in 1998.

The ICR seems to be in denial about the considerable assistance they provided to this cult leader in presenting himself to the Muslim world as a "scientist." Harun Yahya himself still credits the ICR in helping him start his "scientific" career.

All these facts are documented in detail, with reliable references, in the blog post above. This story is hard to believe, you should read the blog post, and check the references therein, before rejecting it out of hand.

11:10 AM, April 26, 2010  
Blogger Escovado said...

Dude, that's a bad case of thread necrophilia you have there. I think you need to get some new batteries for your flashlight.

1:13 PM, April 26, 2010  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

D.,

Ummmm....
Wow....
I didn't know atheists were all into conspiracies. Seeing that I know many of these alleged individuals you're accusing of collusion with some Muslim guy in Turkey, and you are a mocking outsider who really doesn't give a rip about the truth, I prefer to believe my friends over the snarky post of a bitter atheist.

Again, all of those men acknowledge attending that conference in 98, now 12 years ago, at the behest of the Muslim apologetic group hosting it. As they all noted, they were led to believe one thing about the nature of the conference when they committed to attend, but it was switched around when they arrived. A big part of that being they were denied the freedom to proclaim the purpose of their ministry and denied the opportunity to share the gospel.

Moreover, they never had a close, working relationship with this man and his outfit. So to continue to say they did and still do is flatly dishonest, but atheists generally have no qualms about lying against their ideological opponents anyways.

What would help your credibility is if you can show current, as of this year, cooperation and fellowship between Yahya and ICR. Like a consistent pattern. All you have is one conference in 98. That's sort of weak.

By the way, why do you, an evolutionary atheist, care about drugs and sex slavery? Why the out rage over people living according to their natural evolutionary instincts?

3:22 PM, April 26, 2010  
Blogger Diogenes said...

Butler: "you are a mocking outsider who really doesn't give a rip about the truth"

No way Jose, you don't get away with that, saying I don't care about the truth-- no way-- when you cannot back it up with facts. You have not pointed out ONE, not ONE, NOT ONE FACTUAL INACCURACY IN WHAT I WROTE. If you can't point out any factual inaccuracies in anything I wrote, then you are making a drive-by accusation that you know is false.

If you want to claim that I don't care about the truth, you have to
A. prove that something I wrote was inaccuracte, and
B. prove that I knew it was inaccurate, or that I was careless and sloppy.
You have not proven either of these, and your response has several major inaccuracies.

If you can point out just one, just one factual inaccuracy in what I wrote, then point it out, and I'll edit my post and fix it. If you could point out a real inaccuracy, I'd thank you.

But if you cannot point out even one inaccuracy in my blog post, then apologize. I'm serious-- you apologize. You're lying about me. I did not lie about your buddies-- I sourced everything to reliable references, including ICR itself-- and you just lie about me.

But you Fred Butler, you do not get away with a drive-by accusation that I don't care about the truth. My article has 63 references, and all to reliable sources, except the ones that I warn the reader are unreliable. If any of my trusted sources are unreliable, tell me specifically which one. Otherwise, apologize.

But you don't get away with accusing me of lying or not caring about the truth when YOU CANNOT EVEN POINT OUT ONE INACCURACY, NOT ONE!

Secondly, it is you who are making the inaccurate statements. Your inaccurate statements are the following:

Butler: "As they all noted, they were led to believe one thing about the nature of the conference when they committed to attend, but it was switched around when they arrived."

Wrong: They went to three conferences with the BAV in 1998 and one with the Islamic gov't in 1992. If these conferences were so horrible, why did they go to THREE of them in 98? Are you really saying that they went to one conference, the Islamic host didn't let them preach the gospel, they're crushed, and then they go to another conference with the BAV-- and then another after that? That's your story?

Did you even read my blog post before slandering me?

Butler: "all of those men acknowledge attending that conference in 98":

Wrong: conferences, plural, three in 1998 alone. Your statement does not show any inaccuracy whatsoever in my blog post. If "all those men acknowledge attending that conference[s] in 98" and they do so in private, not in print, that does not contradict anything I wrote, which is concerned with published material. In my article I wrote about their published statements in print, only, and I described those 100% accurately. No errors you can point to.

I wrote that last year a spokesman for the ICR sent an e-mail to the Boston Globe stating that the ICR never worked with the BAV or Turkish gov't. This statement from the ICR is contradicted by the ICR's own published articles.

If they say something to you, personally, in private, different from their published statements, I have no way of knowing about your private communications and you have no grounds to call me a liar because I do not know about your private conversations with buddies who wrote something completely different in print.

I also stated, accurately, that the ICR website's articles still has old references to "conferences" in Turkey, not specifically the BAV; but one important article specifically about the BAV has vanished from their website, without explanation.

To be continued.

11:32 AM, May 04, 2010  
Blogger Diogenes said...

Continuing... Second post of 3...

Next Butler lie: "Moreover, they never had a close, working relationship with this man and his outfit. So to continue to say they did and still do is flatly dishonest..."

Wrong. You have flatly, dishonestly, misrepresented what I wrote. I didn't write that they "still do" have a working relationship. You're lying about me and lying about what I wrote. Where, in my post, did I write that they "still do" have a working relationship? Where? Where? Where? I do not state nor imply they worked together after 1998, and they stopped publicizing the BAV conferences after 1999.

Next Butler lie: you falsely claim I wrote that they had a "close, working relationship". I did not write that, you are putting words in my mouth. I wrote that they worked together, which they did-- holding a scientific conference is working together. Conferences are work. I'm sure their salaries and travel expenses were paid, it was working. But I never said "close"; that is a subjective judgement the reader can make, or not make, on his own.

Personally, by my own definition of "close", I would say it was not a "close, working relationship" so I did not use that phrase.

But it's irrelevant. You can have a brief working relationship that does lasting damage to US interests and security. That's the case here.

You dishonestly put the phrase "close, working relationship" in my mouth, which I never said, to make me appear to be a liar.

But as for "working", they were definitely "working" by the standard academic definition: giving a presentation or conference is working.

Butler: "atheists generally have no qualms about lying against their ideological opponents anyways."

Pot calling the kettle black. You have not pointed out even one single inaccuracy in anything I wrote, except imaginary words you dishonestly put in my mouth, and I just pointed out three major inaccuracies in what you wrote! You're accusing me, me, of having no qualms about lying?

Do you know how much you sound just like Harun Yahya? This is exactly what Harun Yahya says when people accurately criticize his words and actions: "They're atheists! Atheists lie because they are amoral!" Nice denial.

It takes chutzpah to accuse others of not caring about the truth when you can't point to a single inaccuracy in my blog post, except imaginary words you dishonestly put in my mouth.

To be continued...

11:35 AM, May 04, 2010  
Blogger Diogenes said...

Continuing... Third and last post.

Butler: "What would help your credibility is if you can show current, as of this year, cooperation and fellowship between Yahya and ICR... All you have is one conference in 98. That's sort of weak."

No, you clearly did not read my blog post. I never said that they still have a working relationship today. In fact, in the conclusion of the article, I imagine that the ICR members probably felt very chagrined and embarrassed to find out how disreputable and unsavory Harun Yahya really is. I stated explicitly that ICR people would not knowingly support an Islamic extremist. I said that they should have known they were working with a crackpot and weirdo. I made that very clear in the concluding section, that you never read.

Butler: "By the way, why do you, an evolutionary atheist, care about drugs and sex slavery? Why the out rage over people living according to their natural evolutionary instincts?"

You sound just like Harun Yahya.

OK, you want to go off-topic: why do you, a Biblical literalist, care about drugs and sex slavery? Drugs are not forbidden in the Bible, and sex slavery is permitted, and in fact, mandated, as long as God's people do it to God's non-people. Exodus 21 says you can sell your daughters into slavery, and in those days owners always had sex with their female slaves, as the slavery laws and many stories (Abraham x Hagar) make clear, so if you're pressed for cash, sell little Hadassah into sex slavery, says Exodus 21. And in Numbers 31, Moses is positively furious with the Israelites for not killing the non-virgin Midianites and making sex slaves of the vigins.

More rape ordered by Yahweh: [Deut. 20:10–15; Deut. 21:10–14; Num. 31:1–47; Isaiah 13:16; Judges 5:30; Judges 21:10–14]. And more slavery sanctioned by Yahweh [Ex. 21:2–8; Ex. 21:20–21; Deut. 20:10–15; Lev. 25:44–46; Isaiah 14:1-2].

So how can you, a Biblical literalist, logically oppose sex slavery, when God's people are ordered to do it to God's non-people?

Martin Luther: "What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church...a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." – [Wikiquote: Martin Luther, Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed., Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossmuthigen von Hessen mit Bucer, vol. 1.]

11:40 AM, May 04, 2010  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home