The Importance of Sources

It seems that creationists have trouble understanding the importance of source material. They are constantly linking to “scientific” articles that supposedly disprove evolution, yet one quick glance is all it takes to discover these articles are written by other creationists with either no scientific credentials or degrees from a university that consists of a trailer in the desert with nothing more than a phone, computer and printer.

Let’s make this simple. If you want to learn about a topic, you need to go to the appropriate source for information. For example, if you want to learn what the theory of evolution is and what the most current knowledge about evolution entails, you need to go to SCIENTISTS. STOP looking for creationists who claim to be scientists. Find an ACCREDITED college and take a class from a real scientist. If you can’t afford to take a college course, go to and take one online for FREE. You can even audit a course in your spare time if you don’t think you can keep up with a regular course – it’s ok, a lot of people work and don’t have the time to take a course online. By auditing you can download the course materials and study at your own pace.

Let me be clear. If you are truly interested in learning you must start without looking for only those ideas that support your preconceived beliefs.

If I want to learn about the bible, I read the bible. If I want to learn why it says something or what something means, I am not going to ask a religious leader with their own agenda. I will talk to experts in HISTORY and LINGUISTICS. If you look for information that only confirms what you already believe, you are not going to learn anything. Sectarian leaders are only going to confirm what their own sect believes. A historian can shed light on the actual activities in the area and time that a text was written. They can confirm or debunk events that are claimed by a text. A linguist can confirm translations from the texts original language and speak to nuances. Most translations of the bible were done with specific agendas.

When creationists post links to “pseudo-scientific” articles about DNA “code” published by a religious organization rather than an accredited scientific laboratory, it only shows us their ignorance.


Published by: assassingrl

I'm just your average marketing goddess who does some freelance writing on the side. Or am I? What if I'm really a hired killer? You don't have anything to worry about unless you are an evil villain, above the reach of the usual law and order types. You know the kind, with enough money and influence to buy their way out of any legal repercussions. That's when the organization I work for steps in. You won't find us in any federal government directory. We're one of those groups that get the conspiracy theorists all hot and bothered. This could just be the plot of a novel I'm working on. Then again...

Categories Science, TwitterTags, , 2 Comments

2 thoughts on “The Importance of Sources”

  1. Please provide one paper their long list of “scientists” has had published in an accredited, peer reviewed journal that shows their research results supporting “Intelligent Design.”

    If you must ignore the overwhelming body of evidence that proves our earth is 4.5 billion years old just to cling to the writings of bronze age goatherds, if you cannot manage to produce repeatable, peer-reviewed, publishable scientific research, then it does not matter what you call yourself, you are not a scientist

    As for their long list… the majority either hold degrees in areas that have no connection to geology, biology, biochemistry or cosmology and no history of research into areas associated with studying the age of the earth or evolution, OR they have degrees from unaccredited diploma mills like Patriot University.

  2. I am not a young earth creationist. But I do not think it is fair to say that they are not scientists. The ICR has a long list of scientists with doctorates and masters. You cannot impune a work simply because it is written by somebody who holds a particular view. That would be textbook ad hominem.

Comments are closed.