I got this comment from someone on an earlier blog entry regarding Creationism.
I came across this site and, although ridiculed by several here, I was very impressed with Purdom’s honest answers to Shermer! Everyone has God given choice to believe what they want but I personally believe there is ample evidence for belief in the Creator God; and it would take more faith on my part to believe evolutionist viewpoint. About 27 years ago I met Dr. Robert Gentry who told his story about discovering published evidence of polonium halos in granite — see http://www.halos.com/ — and lost his job as a result. Scientists whose whole lives and degrees are bound to evolutionary theory do not want to acknowledge such evidence as it would negate their own cherished belief and positions. What Purdom stated is true that there are lots of holes in the theory of evolution–seems like taught as fact now in schools–but it is still just a theory.
First, she did not bother to address the obvious hypocrisy of Georgia Purdom, as noted in my original blog entry. How can you call someone “honest” if there is evidence of hypocrisy? Does Judy need a dictionary?
Second, people are entitled to their own opinions (“I consider the Bible to be the greatest book ever made.”), but they are NOT entitled to their own facts (“The planet Earth is less than 10,000 years old.”). Facts by definition are based on clear empirical evidence and two people looking at the same evidence should come to the same conclusion, which is why science is reliable by nature.
Third, evolution, and all other things in science, is NOT based on faith at all. And scientists usually do not use faith to justify their hypotheses and theories. They may argue about how to interpret limited amounts of evidence, but they all rely on evidence. The reason Creationists say otherwise is projection, the attributing of their own character flaws onto their opponents. Christian fundamentalists literally CANNOT imagine people not having “faith” in something, so they assume that atheists have “faith” there is no God (an outright self-contradiction, since you have to have faith in something, not nothing) and that Atheism is the dogma that motivates scientists to support evolution. But no scientific theory is intended to debunk any specific religion. Science simply ignores religious beliefs.
Fourth, and most damning, polonium does not exist in isolation, but is often a product of the decay of uranium, which itself has a half-life of billions of years.
Polonium is a very rare element in nature because of the short half-life of all its isotopes. 210Po, 214Po, and 218Po appear in the decay chain of 238U; thus polonium can be found in uranium ores at about 0.1 mg per metric ton (1 part in 1010), which is approximately 0.2% of the abundance of radium. The amounts in the Earth’s crust are not harmful. Polonium has been found in tobacco smoke from tobacco leaves grown with phosphate fertilizers.
Because it is present in such small concentrations, isolation of polonium from natural sources is a very tedious process. The largest batch of the element ever extracted, performed in the first half of the 20th century, contained only 40 Ci (1.5 TBq) (9 mg) of polonium-210 and was obtained by processing 37 tonnes of residues from radium production. Polonium is now obtained by irradiating bismuth with high-energy neutrons or protons.
Robert Gentry is most likely a fraud. His research on polonium has never been duplicated by any other scientist. There are plenty of questions about his assumptions and methods.
Gentry is a physicist, not a geologist. He doesn’t follow accepted geologic reporting practice and consistently fails to provide the information that a third party would need to collect comparable samples for testing. For his research, Gentry utilized microscope thin sections of rocks from samples sent to him by others from various places around the world. Thus, he is unable to say how his samples fit in with the local or regional geological setting(s). He also does not provide descriptive information about the individual rock samples that make up his studies – i.e., the abundance and distribution of major, accessory, or trace minerals; the texture, crystal size and alteration features of the rocks; and the presence or absence of fractures and discontinuities.
Finally, saying that evolution is “only a theory” is like saying Barack Obama is only the President of the United States. A theory is actually the most powerful idea in science, bringing together an unlimited number of observations regarding a certain subject in an explanatory framework. The attempts to poke holes in evolutionary theory result from dishonesty, delusions, confusion about how evolution is supposed to work, and refusal to consider actual facts. That has always been the case!