New helium retention work suggests young earth and accelerated decay

I think there is a big difference. Max Plank and others took their arguments to their fellow scientists. they published their results, they argued at meetings. The work was transparent and available for anyone to challenge. Most creationists (including Humphreys) don't make a legitimate attempt to legitimize their work. On a positive note, I did notice they presented at AGU. Comments from colleagues were less than positive regarding the work based on its shoddy science and not on his relationship to ICR. Let's see if he makes an attempt to publish in something other than the 'feel good' rags of ICR.CheersJoe Meert

AGU (so far as I know) accepts just about anything from anybody. The meeting is SOOOOO Big (ok by geology standards ~12000) that almost everyone gets a poster except for special sessions and invited speakers. Thus, it's not a big honor to have an abstract accepted nor does it automatically attach scientific integrity to the study. I talked to several people who saw the paper and talked to Humphreys. Basically, they thought the ideas were 'crap'.CheersJoe Meert