Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics

This book does an excellent job of showing how weak the case for naturalistic evolution really is, and how ineffective the attacks against special creation made by evolutionists have been. Gish clearly shows that evolutionists have little more than their speculations, but they want everyone to believe that they are practicing solid science. Evolutionism is dogma, not good science, and Gish proves this beyond reasonable doubt.

I enjoyed reading this book because I'm a YEC myself. Being a YEC, I've seen a lot of material insulting the integrity and academic quality of Creationist material. I've seen insults hurled at Gish, Morris, etc. All of this can be quite disheartning. It always got me thinking, "What if I'm following a group of dishonest, bad scientists? What if every quote I see from Creationist literature is a misquote?"Fortunately, Dr. Gish does an excellent job refuting some of the serious charges leveled against him and against Creation scientists in general. Unfortunately, Gish cannot actually stop his critics with this book, because the mud-slinging material is created faster than it can be refuted. So, on the internet, I still read things about Gish being dishonest, or stupid, or both. However, why should I believe any of these charges when Gish has successfully refuted so many other mud-slinging attempts? After Gish shows, numerous times, that evolutionists are often careless in their accusations of misquotation, why should I believe any other accusations? In this book, Dr. Gish has answered so much evolutionary nonsense that one must be sceptical of ANY evolutionist accusation they may send at Creation scientists.Gish also highlights a few of the more harsh polemics used against Creation scientists over the years. After reading these, I found myself asking, "Why would I trust accusations from a man or woman with so much hatred towards Creation scientists and so little respect for a reasonable, balanced argument?" I think Gish highlights that the reason for such harsh slur has more to do with religion than it does with science. Reading anti-creationist diatribes always makes me feel a little better, because the author exposes his religous and philosophical commitment as well as his disrespect for differing viewpoints.The discussion of the fossil record is good, as Gish once again highlights that evolutionists, for the most part, don't discuss invertabrates or fishes (even though invertebrates take up 95% of the fossil record). Gish's chapter on Thermodynamics is great. He exposes Dr. John Patterson's less-than-academic arguments and reveals Patterson's true motivation. While doing this, Gish makes a strong case that Thermodynamics contradicts evolution. Until reading this book, I had never really thought of the Thermodynamics argument very much, because critics had insulted the integrity of the Thermodynamic attack and say things like, "Of all the bogus arguments Creationists have been able to come up with, the Thermodynamics argument is the most ridiculous". However, Gish made me realize that the reason for such harshness is not power of argument, but the utterly serious implications! If Thermodynamics really does contradict evolution, we can throw evolution out the door.All in all, Gish does an excellent job of what he says in the book's title.

As witnessed by some of the emotionally charged, uninformed comments below, evolutionists do NOT want you to read this book! Duane Gish (the author) received his Ph.D in Biochemistry from U.C. Berkeley. He held key positions at Berkeley, Cornell University Medical College, and The Upjohn Company (a leading biochemical firm), where he collaborated with former Nobel Prize winners in various projects, before leaving to join the staff of ICR (Institute for Creation Research). I am not aware of them awarding Ph.Ds and key positions to incoherent, crazed, fanatical, babbling lunatics who havn't the slightest clue about science. Perhaps there is another side of the story we haven't heard from some of the 'objective' comments by evolutionists? Are creationists' arguments comprised entirely of blind 'religion', and truly devoid of scientific merit? Sidney W. Fox, an evolutionist, admitted the following about leading creationist biochemist and debater, Dr. Duane Gish: "Duane Gish has very strong scientific credentials. As a biochemist, he has synthesized peptides, compounds intermediate between amino acids and proteins. He has been co-author of a number of outstanding publications in peptide chemistry." [Sidney W. Fox, The Emergence of Life: Darwinian Evolution from the Inside (NY: Basic Books, 1988), p. 46. Fox is a leading chemical evolutionist who believes life evolved from "proteinoid microspheres."] Let's see what another well-known evolutionist had to say. Included below are a few minor quotes from Gish's book. In chapter 8 of "Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics", Gish begins his critique of Eldredge's anti-creationist book: "..Niles Eldredge, a curator at the American Museum of Natural History and an invertebrate paleontologist, is one of the chief architects of the punctuated equilibrium notion about evolution." "[Eldredge] has been a very active anti-creationist and is the author of the book, 'The Monkey Business. A Scientist Looks At Creationism.'" "Eldredge, in Chapter 1 [of his book], states that: 'Creationists today--at least the majority of their spokesmen--are highly educated, intelligent people' (p.17)" "[Eldredge] thus contradicts Stephen Jay Gould's favorite characterization of creationists as 'yahoos'. Concerning the debates, which he states have taken place all over the United States, Eldredge says, "The creationists nearly always win" (p.17). He admits that creationists don't argue religion, have always done their homework, and nearly always seem better informed than their opponents, whom, he says, "are reduced too often to a bewildered state of incoherence." The creationists, by Eldredge's admission, don't argue religion, sticking strictly to a discussion of the relevant scientific evidence. Then why, if, as Eldredge believes, evolutionists have all the scientific evidence on their side and creationists have nothing but pseudoscience to support their case, don't evolutionists blow the creationists

This book, Creation Scienctists Answer Their Critics, is, indeed, an invaluable work. It exposese several things among the evolutionists:1) That they have no respect for science. 2) That they have no resepct for Truth.3) That they are only interested in deceiving the public.4) That they have been beaten so bad by Dr. Gish, that they must sink to such levels as slander, and calumny, in order to keep their (sinking) evolutionist 'battleship' afloat. For without this 'battleship', they would lose their pentions.... and might actually have to admit that a God did, indeed, create the earth. And, of course, this is impossible for the athiests to admit, and this book shows that they are willing to do anything in order to keep the Truth OUT of the hands of the people.For those who question this review, or question any of the points made within this review, I invite to buy the book, read it. And then come back with your comments.

Dr.Gish reviews the arguments and misinformation in what should be a free and open discussion and scientific analysis. Unfortunately one can see by the book reviews of books on creation (life) by design, remarks unusually printed in all capital letters, that an intelectual discussion about scientific evidence, based on Facts and not personal attacks, is difficult given the almost cultist like hatred held by those believing their brains are the product of coagulating pond gunk. This book is a great resource for those interested in reviewing the history and persons involved in the historical arguement.