Hi Nij,
And when you have tens of thousands of different scientists from hundreds of different cultures and religions all finding the same data and coming to the same conclusions, why do you think this is confirmation bias rather than just confirmation?
I was just stating a natural aspect of science. Unless you wish to suggest scientists come to the lab with no beliefs and expectations on what they should find today ?
Besides, your statement is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. It isn't 99% of the scientific community all agreeing upon the same conclusion and a handful of creationists on the sideline.
Need I point out that the first people to invalidate the global flood myth were in fact those who went looking specifically to demonstrate that it was true?
Well, I guess you do need to name these persons.
Name one prediction that was made by the creationist model and turned out to be correct. By prediction I mean "something that could have falisified the concept should it turn out any other way". By "correct" I don't mean "gerrymandered into fitting the a priori assumptions of the Bible being perfect".
Baumgardner's Catastrophic plate tectonics model, which he modeled in the 80's predicted that the tectonic plates subducted at great speed into the earth's mantle. In other words, with such a quick subductions so recent in the past, we should be able to detect this 'cold plates' at the base of the mantle.
This was in fact observed 10 years later, when the required technology was developped, the cold material was found as predicted. (S.P. Grand, Mantle shear structure beneath the Americas and surrounding oceans, Journal of Geophysical Research 99:11591—11621, 1994; J.E. Vidale, A snapshot of whole mantle flow, Nature 370:16—17, 1994.)
This is in fact contrary to the uniformitarian view of plate tectonics, since at today's slow rate, the plates would simply melt inch by inch as they slowly went into the mantle.
ICR and AIG collect thousands each year from donations.
Idiots like Michael Behe and Ken Ham earn hundreds of thousands each year from their book sales.
Kent Hovind owned 10 properties which were seized after he was convicted of owing US$600000 in taxes from a 3 year period; that's 200K a year, which means he and/or his company earned at least a million dollars each year through book and merchandise sales. That is, in fact, what was reported as quoted here. His theme park was earning that much on its own.
Thousands of donations isn't much when you consider the amount of employees they have, and all the rest, don't you think ? When you consider that research projects can go in the millions (as was the case with the RATE) it is expected that they research a lot less then publicly funded researchers.
Behe is not a creationist.
And Hovind is an idiot.
™ Version 4.2
