Australian-born creationist and chess chimp Jonathan Sarfati helps to run Creation Ministries International, an organization that while openly founded on biblical literalism, pushes the "creation science" angle and attempts to refute real science such as evolution and the big bang theory using scientific-sounding ideas.
One of the ways this organization tries to make its theories sound more credible is to constantly remind people that many of its contributors have PhDs obtained from "secular" (i.e. genuine) scientific institutions. This is a very common creationist tactic which I've written about before, and Jonathan Sarfati is one of the worst offenders I know of. Sarfati has a PhD in physical chemistry, and recently I've been trawling through creation.com's feedback section and counting the number of times he's drawn attention to this fact. I've found so many instances of this, I've had to cut my search short, so the following list is far from comprehensive:
I speak as one with a Ph.D. in physical chemistry
Dr Sarfati is a Ph.D. physical chemist
(Dr) Jonathan Sarfati
I have a Ph.D. in physical chemistry as well as being trained in formal logic,
As a Ph.D. physical chemist, needing no instruction in thermodynamics,
I’m a Ph.D. scientist
I’m one of many creationist Ph.D. scientists
I’m a Ph.D. physical chemist
Dr Jonathan Sarfati, whose Ph.D. is in physical chemistry, of which thermodynamics is an important part.
Ph.D. physical chemist Dr Jonathan Sarfati
Since my speciality for my Ph.D. thesis and the incorporated published papers was vibrational spectroscopy, I'm extremely familiar with harmonic oscillator wavefunctions.
one does cover such things in a chemistry Ph.D as one of us (JS) has earned
Which particular parts of human knowledge are we supposedly ignorant of? Perhaps chemistry, although I have a doctorate in it?
Ph.D. chemist Dr Jonathan Sarfati
Nice to meet a fellow Ph.D. chemist :)
I actually wonder whether Miller or this critic actually understand quantum physics (an important part of my own Ph.D. research).
I myself have an earned doctorate in science, and co-authored a paper in Nature on high-Tc superconductors when only 22.
Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D. (which included papers involving NMR spectroscopy published in secular journals, incidentally)
He does indeed have his name on a 1987 Nature paper, although his exact contribution to the paper is not clear. As well as this he has five other papers published in scientific journals, but he hasn't published outside of creationist literature since 1995 and his h-index currently stands at a lowly 3, with several of his papers having never received a single citation.
As well as responding to criticism from christians and non-christians alike with a sneering and condescending tone, Sarfati is also keen on quoting scripture, so I'll finish by doing the same:
When pride comes, then comes disgrace; but with the humble is wisdom.
Proverbs 11:2
Posts
49 comments:
The title of this post should be "Pretentious Moron of the Month..."
Just so that you know, evolution is also a theory...and many scientists who are not Christians have spoken out against it, try reading David Stowe or Denton. Hate for you to appear close minded!
Anon-
Are you aware that Denton has changed his position and now accepts evolutionary theory? BTW, using the word "theory" in the context you employ it, is just plain ignorant.
Anonymous,
If you're going to suggest people read something, it would be helpful if you'd say exactly what. I already knew Denton had changed his mind, and switched to a more deistic conception of God's creation in Nature's Destiny, but when it came to David Stowe, I was forced to ask...who?!
It turns out there are two David Stowes. One is an anaesthesiologist, and another is a Yale professor who specializes in popular American culture of the 20th century. I'm sure I could read Swing Changes: Big Band Jazz in New Deal America, but I'd be hard pressed to guess what sort of relevance it has to evolution.
Could you help a guy out, please?
oh wow
gr8 attacking people
Now where's the evidence for evolution?
This is what you "learned" scholars do? you find someone who is GLOBALLY recognized and revered and take cheap, childish shots at him? I clicked on to this lame little site just to see what the lame HATERS had to say. I can only laugh and shake my head at your UTTER IGNORANCE! This man has spent DECADES learning, praying and PROVING his arguments - what can you say for yourselves? Let me guess..."we believe that all of this..all this life and love and magesty surrounding us, the world, the people in it, all the animals, all the minutia of life...it all came from a piece of algae on a meteorite." I truly pity your ignorance.
"oh wow
gr8 attacking people
Now where's the evidence for evolution?"
If you are too lazy or too stupid to google "evolution evidence" then that is your problem.
Now where is your evidence against it? And I mean scientifically accepted evidence, not some book written by a bunch of syphilitic tribesmen 2000 years ago.
Shadowjack:)
"This is what you "learned" scholars do? you find someone who is GLOBALLY recognized and revered and take cheap, childish shots at him?"
Johnny boy Sarfathead ain't globally respected or worshipped.I'm sure if he stopped taking childish shots at atheism we'd stop giving him a dose of his own medicine.
"I clicked on to this lame little site just to see what the lame HATERS had to say. I can only laugh and shake my head at your UTTER IGNORANCE!"
I would say that believing in an imaginary sky fairy, just to get through the day is so lame it is pathetic. This site is wonderful in comparison. Cretinists are always ignorant folk, with no real understanding of science.
"This man has spent DECADES learning, praying and PROVING his arguments - what can you say for yourselves?"
What exactly has he been learning?
Biblical bullshit? As for praying...he'd be better off doing something other than useless fantasizing that an imaginary magic sky fairy will listen to his sad little wishes.
"Let me guess..."we believe that all of this..all this life and love and magesty surrounding us, the world, the people in it, all the animals, all the minutia of life...it all came from a piece of algae on a meteorite."
No, thats panspermia. It doesn't answer abiogenesis questions. It only foists them off to somewhere else. Its a bit like religion, only more possible.
"I truly pity your ignorance."
Take your head from out of your ass,and read some good science books instead of the "bibble". You are the one who is ignorant, of reality and science.
Shadowjack:)
HERE IS A GOOD QUESTION: How many of you who comment about Dr J Sarfati have actually discussed your objections with him first - before telling others what you think of him and his statements? Well, I have met him in person, had a good talk and am convinced that he is a genuine scientist, truth seeker and truth follower. Hence my advice: please do yourself a favour and do not publish your opinions without re-checking the facts first. These matters are too important to be taken lightly, uninformed, with bias or prejudice.
This is too funny...you dont prove his theory wrong...instead you just attackt the man.
TYPICALLY for those hardcore evo's who are brain washed and cannot think out of their so called 'package'...
Evolution is theory...not facts.
Yes, there is tiny fractions that might be scientific...BUT this does NOT mean the rest of theory is scientific!!!
Both Creation and Evolution is a theory. Well, we'll only see what one is correct when either of these two groups come up with TRUE FULL scientific evidence!
True scientific facts...look it up on Wikipedia:
"Scientific facts are generally believed to be independent of the observer: no matter who performs a scientific experiment, all observers will agree on the outcome."
So when the Evolutionist present his ideas even a scientist (Christian) will accept the idea because he redid the test in lab and there for recoqnize it as a scientific fact.
Scientific fact is NOT scientific fact if only the same people with same idea is confirming your idea. It has to everyone...even your opponents have to redo the test and if it comes out as a fact what that's said is true...then its scientific fact - NOT before can it be seen as "scientific fact"...
Strange how all Evolutionists believe they present facts when some of their peers has confirmed their idea.
So they present peers who believe the same as them as proving their case.
Its kind of having the fox watching the geese.
Evolutionists you are NOT reliable by using your 'own sources' to present facts...sorry!
"Evolution" mixes two things together, one real, one imaginary. Variation (microevolution) is the real part. The types of bird beaks, the colors of moths, leg sizes, etc. are variation. Each type and length of beak a finch can have is already in the gene pool for finches. Creationists have always agreed that there is variation within species. What evolutionists do not want you to know is that there are strict limits to variation that are never crossed, something every breeder of animals or plants is aware of. Whenever variation is pushed to extremes by selective breeding (to get the most milk from cows, sugar from beets, bristles on fruit flies, or any other characteristic), the line becomes sterile and dies out. And as one characteristic increases, others diminish. But evolutionists want you to believe that changes continue, merging gradually into new kinds of creatures. This is where the imaginary part of the theory of evolution comes in. It says that new information is added to the gene pool by mutation and natural selection to create frogs from fish, reptiles from frogs, and mammals from reptiles, to name a few.
Not one single mutated gene has ever been found to improve or benefit a species!
Evolutionists...come forward with just one example of the above...or your _theory_ is DEAD - and remember it has a be a scientific proof!!!
There are groups of Christians who are ALSO totally blind from others ideas...wake up and get a life...
If you want to bash other peoples ideas...start with thinking about your own theory if it has problems. Maybe you should try to read some of your opponents ideas and try to be objective when reading them. Set your own idea aside and consider seriuosly their arguments if they 'hold water' so to speak...
The same also counts for Evolutionists...be objective when you read about problems that Christians scientists have come up with problems with your theory.
Together, Christian scientists or non-Christian scientists, we can actually accomplish something together and get to the 'true scientific facts'...so work together instead.
Don't be so close minded that you cannot consider other peoples theory OBJECTLIVELY!
Attacking your opponent is NOT scientific and its NOT helping your case - it only shows YOUR stupidity!
Geez, don't have a bird, Danni.
"you can't spell "atheist" without "hate." "
You can't spell "Christianity" without "insanity." See, we can play games, too.
Forgive me, but I do not see your credentials? We know from your blog that Dr. Sarfati holds a Ph.D and that he is a chess chAmp (name calling is for immature children and does not further your credibility - unless you actually made a spelling error, in which case, proof-read)
Check your facts, Dr. Sarfati entered the "secular" institutions of which you speak BEFORE he became a creationist. I actually had the opportunity to hear him speak; interestingly, not once did he resort to name calling. He did however present scientific facts pointing to an Intelligent Design (ie, a Creator) Makes me wonder... perhaps you are afraid of him? You can't dispute him, so you ridicule him.
Danni wrote:"Not one single mutated gene has ever been found to improve or benefit a species!
Evolutionists...come forward with just one example of the above...or your _theory_ is DEAD - and remember it has a be a scientific proof!!!"
WRONG. Ever heard of bacteriologist Richard Lenski and his team at Michigan State University? Thought not. Ever heard of the Ara-3 batch of bacteria? No? Well due to one beneficial mutation that bacteria could draw nourishment from citrate, as well as the usual glucose. So we have scientific evidence. Creationists have only their faith in an ancient book. Scientific evidence trumps your fantasy Danni!
Chaosian:)
It makes me sick to see theists just shit all over science. After all science has done for you and the rest of the planet. You don't deserve the medical care/ pharmaceuticals / hang on just about every facet of your pitiful existence. Just rely on god to make you better, because science is mainly the reason your here at all. Lets see how well you do without it. Sarfati knows better, he just can't make any money in science.
After perusing your blogs, I find it interesting that those who call others morons and cretins can't seem to be able to muster enough brain cells that haven't been killed by alcohol or messed up by drugs to formulate an intelligent rebuttal, but can only resort to the weapons of infantile name-calling and ridicule. I'd suggest you grow up but you probably couldn't figure out how. Such a pity.
Surely if evolutionary theory was correct we would see animals morphing before our very eyes!
Unfortunately, I think the general populace have to resort to name calling because they are so frustrated with the sheer stubbornness of creationists to accept what is taken for granted in the scientific community. Creationists still hold to their outdated beliefs (outdated by over a century) that there is no evidence of evolution, well how about you get yourself down to a museum and look, get yourself down to a library and read a book (stick to the non-fiction section and stay away from the bible and Johnathan Sarfati for that matter) or get yourself out into the open air and just look at the things around you and do your own research.
If you're an uninformed creationist who has formed their opinion of the world from another uninformed creationist, search for 'Objections to evolution' on Wikipedia, and just please, please read the whole thing (obviously Wikipedia should be backed up by your own research into the subject as well, but it gives a broad overview of all of the nonsensical arguments that your kind has used and are still using).
There is no need to be so naive in these wonderful times of science and technology, and those who try to pervert education with their own narrow minded beliefs should just take one step backwards (hopefully into a library).
Haha, your a moron!
Even the great Carl Sagan called atheists stupid.
But you atheists ignore actual science.
True insanity is atheism as you just simply think you know more than everyone else without any actual credible evidence, I am yet to meet an atheist with a brain or not flipping burgers.
Pfft!, that's meaning less!, evos have been trying to push that as "evidence" for evolution for years.
It's called micro evolution Sherlock!, simply variation within a species which a micro organim is. You evos know nothing!
And that ancient book has sold 10x more copes than any evolution glorifying book will ever hope to sell!
Well sure you can, Christianity, see no "insanity" in sight.
And the only true insanity is believing that a frog can turn into a prince over millions of years.
The evolutionist Dr Lee m Spetner proved that!
OK... creationsists, if you're right, you should have spent your life praying a lot, loving one another, trying to be more God like etc. If you're wrong, you won't be going to heaven but will have spent your life much the same as if you were right.
Evolutionists, if you're right, you're getting all up tight over nothing. To what end? If you're wrong, one day you'll have some explaining to do to God.
Evolutionists, apparently we have evovled freedom of expression, speech etc. Creationists, God gave people a free will. Doesn't this mean that both sides agree that ultimately people have the right to believe what they want? You can lead a horse to water...
Your comment is totally ridiculous: "One of the ways this organization tries to make its theories sound more credible is to constantly remind people that many of its contributors have PhDs obtained from "secular" (i.e. genuine) scientific institutions. This is a very common creationist tactic which I've written about before, and Jonathan Sarfati is one of the worst offenders I know of."..........There is absolutely nothing wrong with reminding the reader that the author is a PHD in physical chemistry. Remember that these reminders are not for one person but are an accumulation over discussions with many different people. If you have conversations with many different people then you would normally tell each of them your name. Are you going to also say that giving your name is an offensive tactic too? Come on, try being honest instead of disingenuous as so many of you "debunker types" are.
There is a perfectly good reason why a creationist would emphasize their secular educational qualifications. It is because the evolutionist believes that creationism belongs to the uneducated. They believe that intelligent educated people are naturally going to endorse evolution, through rational logic, and scientific appeal. What really angers the evolutionist is that intelligent logical scientifically minded people can denounce evolution and accept creationism on the basis that creationism is intelligent, logical, and scientific. That is exactly what is angering this blogger, and the repetition to which he refers is required to overcome that myth. The fact is intelligent logical scientifc minded people do believe in creationism, it has nothing to do with boasting, only a get used to it appeal to evolutionists.
1) The only reason 'creation science' (so-called) has currency in today's world is because major elements of Science, proper, have embraced Evolution as a religion. The word, Evolution, of course, literally means, 'an unfolding' or 'an unrolling', or a staged revelation. That is exactly what the Bible describes in GENESIS. 'Creation Science' has gotten traction because the people who need something to discount truth and veracity in favour of their own private and sometimes perverse agendas, commandeered the Evolution idea. Before Evolution, they commandeered electricity -- and gave Faraday trouble. So now it's Darwin on whose behalf they claim to speak. The amusing aspect of this religio-political brand of Evolution is that Sir Richard Owen, Darwin's superior and advisor, pre-empted Darwin by forshadowing information technology as the major technical factor in species revelation. Guess who has now been proved correct? Sorry; Evolution, like electricity, is no longer suitable for justifying neglect of the Bible, truth, decency, and all the rest of the rabble-rousing agenda.
See www.creationtheory.com if at all interested in the technical facts of Evolution. That's a mainstream site, and is therefore opposed by AIG & co.. It also happens to be accurate.
Don't worry -- the God who made the heavens and the earth, being the perfect gentleman, does not force people to believe him as though we are puppets. There will always be an electricity or an evolution or some diversion.
Matthew Heywod, While I agree that Evolution is a religion, with a small priesthood telling what I consider to be the ignorant masses what to believe, I hardly think www.creationtheory.com could be described as mainstream. Also it does not seem to be openly opposed by AiG and co as you claim, probably because it doesn't provide a huge amount of information. Are you advertising your own site? And what is your point 2) having a point 1)?
Ho hum ...yawn!
While men argue, God continues to create life - yes evolutionists - He created you too and He loves you despite your rejection of Him.
A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with a theory.
I have experienced more "God-incidents" than coincidences and I KNOW He is real.
Know the truth and the truth will set you free - or stay locked up in theory...your choice chaps.
Read "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell.
I am very surprised that Jonathan safari is labelled moron of the month. On the contrary I think he has the guts and courage to challenge the so called scientific theory of evolution which was and is the accepted norm of the unquestioning scientific community. Wonder who is the real moron.
Personal and insulting attacks on someone because of their beliefs are completely unnecessary.
If you have a problem with the man's position, attack his position and logic. That's what real seekers of the truth would do.
This post is a really weak and senseless attack on someone who offers a different perspective.
UAW Local 900. Michigan Truck; Wayne Assembly; ISA; Committees; Union Label. Tony Neal, UAW Benefits Rep. Office (734) 467-0039. Walter Robinson, Job Layout Office (734) 467-0293 Michigan Ave Animal Hospital Offers Preventive Care, Medical. Michigan Avenue Animal Hospital-an Animal clinic located in Ypsilanti, MI. Veterinarians provide Pet Health & Emergency Vet Care, Boarding, Grooming in Ypsilanti-Ann.
Site like these never show any scientific evidence against creationism, they just ridicule and name call like 3rd graders. Where as sites like www.creation.com show actual scientific evidence. If you want to scientific evidence, check one of the 8,500 articles on this site.
Ask yourself this question why won't creationists debate Dr. Sarfati ? They are afraid to be left looking silly.
"Argumentum ad hominem" is an attack against the person rather than dealing with the person's arguments. I find the good Doctor's discussion distinguishing species from kind to explain many misunderstandings quite interesting. He even criticizes DOCTOR Hugh Ross, creationist astrophysist and founder of Reasons to Believe, for adhering to a static species model. Many interesting ideas from Doctor Safarti. But among his critics, since you don't seem to take on his arguments and are stuck on his references to his credentials, would the critics please list THEIR credentials...just to compare and contrast? OR...challenge him to a chess match...best of three?
"Argumentum ad hominem" is an attack against the person rather than dealing with the person's arguments. I find the good Doctor's discussion distinguishing species from kind to explain many misunderstandings quite interesting. He even criticizes DOCTOR Hugh Ross, creationist astrophysist and founder of Reasons to Believe, for adhering to a static species model. Many interesting ideas from Doctor Safarti. But among his critics, since you don't seem to take on his arguments and are stuck on his references to his credentials, would the critics please list THEIR credentials...just to compare and contrast? OR...challenge him to a chess match...best of three?
Touche to the last person's comment. I can imagine if you took the person's brain who started this blog and magnified it 10,000 times, then shoved it up a mosquito's ass it would bounce around like a BB in a box car :))))
Watch how I humiliated Sarfati on the Line of Fire blog. I got him to admit that Christianity is not the least bit scientific and that he thinks the church was right to murder millions of unbelievers. What a sad piece of shit Sarfati is.
Watch how I humiliated Sarfati on the Line of Fire blog. I got him to admit that Christianity is not the least bit scientific and that he thinks the church was right to murder millions of unbelievers. What a sad piece of shit Sarfati is.
This site (creationistidiocy) uses emotional, disrespectful, uneducated and utterly childish language to bash respected people that have conducted decades of research, I would not support usage of such language when talking about anyone at all. This gives us a clear idea of how hopeless the author of this website is, a total wacko.
Equating evolution with science is nonsense. It is more like wishful thinking parading like science. The Lenski experiment, cited as the best of 'evolutionary science' is a work of art in illustrated how silly and desperate evolutionists/atheists are. They break something, cit transporter operon, and claim it is a useful mutation. Ha ha ha....
E coli can already use citrate in anoxic situations. Ever heard of the citric acid cycle??
It is not the preferred way for energy production as it is not as efficient.
That's the best you have to offer?
You should be ashamed of yourself!
Cough up some evidence, or keep quiet....
And, oh, please grow a brain....
I don't like people like you. I also would say you are Satanically blinded to an extremely high degree. How else can one explain your great faith in Darwinism, especially while information science, genetic science, and molecular machine discoveries have ripped out the foundation of the evolution conjecture.
Truth is :The fool has said in his heart. "There is no *GOD*. Histories greater KING David.Father too Solomon,wisest of men.
In my sanity I see order comes from order.
No transitional fossils is enough evidence for the teachable wise.
How many times did a Catapillar have to come out as a Mouse before it came out as a Butterfly . Get that sand out of your ears heathen. Every word You shall give account of in that day. How many faulty placenta`s before a sperm found a healthy egg to fertilise. Get a brain dreamers. WE ARE FEARFULLY AND WONDERFULLY MADE FOLKS.
Creationism is moronic and stupid, and wrong. It requires a faith in something first and it all develops from that. The fact is the foundation of faith is wrong, the bible is a set of legends, myths, and fantasies. Faith has no place in science, only evidence has that place.
Nice Commentry, that makes a lot of sense. And you didn't ridicule anyone.
Reply to Dumb Lel: As a devout Christian and ceationist who sees God's infinite intelect and ability behind the design of all the incredible and vast biological complexity that surrounds us, I stand in awe of your unquestioning faith in your presumed god of 'science'. As Christians we have as the foundation for our faith the Bible which provides us with a written account of creation. The Bible is still considered the go to book for contemporary middle eastern archiologists because of its incredible accuracy and its information has been proven to be valid by the many prophecies that secular history has borne out to have come to fruition just as prophecied. Operational and observational science by definition needs to be observable and repeatable. Please see if you can recall one example where mankind ever has observed the change of one kind of animal to another. Examples like Darwins finches or the Peppered moth examples which are nothing but instances of speciation resulting from different phenotypic expression of existing genes in response to changes in environmental conditions.
Please do not view this as a personal attack as it is definitely not intended that way. I view you as a brother who has been fearfully and wonderfully made in the image of an awesome and loving God, but I cannot stand by and see someone, who is precious in God's estimation, deceived by the prevailing institutional lie. Please objectively study the evidence that the creation scientists bring to the debate and honestly reflect on the information at hand before conclusively making your mind up. If you do I promise you that you will be amazed at what you discover. No one like to be lied to for someone else's nefarious purposes and I'm sure you don't either.
Anonymous!! They usually are.
Do you know what "theory" means anonymous? Obviously not.
Did you know that you can shorten your long links with Shortest and get dollars for every click on your shortened urls.
Post a Comment