Soon: The International Creationist Conference

This is about something more difficult to imagine than any of the creationists’ bible tales. Take a look at this headline: International Creation Conference Returns.

Think about it. Repeat the words. Mind-boggling, isn’t it? Perhaps it will be easier to understand if we tell you that the author is Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo), the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. He’s the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, famed not only for his creationist ministry, Answers in Genesis (AIG), but also for the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum, and for building an exact replica of Noah’s Ark.

As yes, now it’s starting to make sense. This is the sort of thing we’ve learned to expect from ol’ Hambo. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:

It’s always exciting when new scientific research from a biblical perspective is presented.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! We can’t stop now. Hambo says:

Well, every four or five years there’s a large creation conference for scientists and other biblical creationist researchers to do just that! And the 2018 dates have just been announced.

[*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh! [*End Drool Mode*] Let’s read on:

The International Conference on Creationism (ICC), a global event held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, is going to be taking place July 29–August 1, 2018. This event is an outreach of the Creation Science Fellowship of Pittsburgh.

That group has a website, but we won’t link to it. However, Wikipedia has a short write-up on their quadrennial festivals — see International Conference on Creationism. Ol’ Hambo continues:

Many staff members here at AiG, with doctorate degrees in a variety of science and other fields, plan to attend the ICC and present their peer-reviewed research papers.

[*Begin Drool Mode*] Ooooooooooooh! [*End Drool Mode*] Their papers are “peer reviewed.” Here’s more:

You’ve probably heard the false claims of many secularists who say that creation research isn’t conducted and reviewed. This major international conference refutes that ridiculous falsehood. Of course, many secularists claim that if a person (even a person with a PhD) believes in creation, then he or she can’t be a real scientist! That’s the sort of prejudice and intolerance that exists in the secular world.

Prejudice and intolerance! You’re probably guilty of it, aren’t you, dear reader? Moving along:

One of our staff members has been highly involved in the ICC over the past 20 years. Dr. Andrew Snelling, AiG geologist (PhD, University of Sydney, Australia) and director of research, affectionately describes the ICC as the “geek gathering of creation scientists and informed laypeople who want to hear about or present the latest in creationist research. The ICC also allows the opportunity for connecting with other creationists.” By the way, Dr. Snelling has twice won ICC’s top award for technical research papers.

We’ve written about some of Snelling’s posts at the AIG website. They describe him as “Geologist, Speaker, Author, Researcher, Editor-in-chief of Answers Research Journal.” Regarding AIG’s “peer reviewed” journal, we previously wrote this:

[T]ake a look at the Instructions to Authors Manual for that prestigious journal. In the section on “Paper Review Process” it says:

The following criteria will be used in judging papers:

1. Is the paper’s topic important to the development of the Creation and Flood model?

2. Does the paper’s topic provide an original contribution to the Creation and Flood model?

3. Is this paper formulated within a young-earth, young-universe framework?

4. If the paper discusses claimed evidence for an old earth and/or universe, does this paper offer a very constructively positive criticism and provide a possible young-earth, young-universe alternative?

5. If the paper is polemical in nature, does it deal with a topic rarely discussed within the origins debate?

6. Does this paper provide evidence of faithfulness to the grammatical-historical/normative interpretation of Scripture?

That, dear reader, is creationist peer review. Here’s one last excerpt from Hambo’s essay:

The ICC organizers have already issued a call for papers for what will be the Eighth International Conference on Creationism. The overall theme for 2018 will be Developing and Systematizing the Creation Model of Origins. Our faculty are already considering what papers they might contribute in the next two years.

Hambo’s “faculty” are already working on their papers. What about you, dear reader? You don’t want to be left out of this event, do you? There’s still time, but you’d better get busy!

Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

18 responses to “Soon: The International Creationist Conference

  1. 7. All papers will be viewed once, put down and then picked up and viewed again. There, all papers have been re-viewed.

  2. I’m thinking of submitting a paper on what I wrote about last year: Waste Disposal on Noah’s Ark — Solved!

  3. At last! An opportunity for the Discoveroids to set up the ‘information table’ that the United Methodist Conference ‘banned’ from their own gathering!

  4. Ken Phelps

    It must be difficult to set an agenda for such a conference, what with the veritable blizzard of scientific papers proving creation. I’m surprised they don’t hold one every month!

  5. Our Curmudgeon ponders:

    I’m thinking of submitting a paper on what I wrote about last year: Waste Disposal on Noah’s Ark — Solved!

    Go for it! It certainly meets all their selection criteria!

    And maybe time to run another ‘Curmudgeon Creative Challenge’ to garner more entries for submission!

  6. docbill1351

    I think it’s charming how creationists rise up every 4-5 years to have their little gathering. Like locusts.

  7. Homeopaths have a conference. Guess it is a legit science.

    Feng shui has a conference. Guess it is legit too!

    If any creationist claims that homeopathy or that Feng shui is pseudoscience but that creationism is the real deal, they are just being intolerant and suppressing the truth in their unrighteousness.

  8. In their own words (from Wikipedia):
    ” We cannot discover by scientific investigation anything about the creative processes used by the Creator”.

    Given that statement, this whole idea of a creationist conference presenting “scientific” papers to support scientific creationism and intelligent design is nothing but a farce.

  9. waldteufel

    It looks as though every four years, the Cargo Cult of Vanuatu moves their pretend scientific stuff to Pittsburgh, with an intermediate stop in Kentucky. Here, they gather up Hambo and his merry band of “creation scientists”, and fits them with lab coats freshly woven from grass and palm fronds. Thus attired and after creating an appropriate amount of drool, they shuffle off to present their ginormously important rehash of origins history and the second coming of John Frum. Or somebody. . . .

  10. I look forward to a paper describing in detail the evolution and distribution of species from the “kinds” taken on the ark. The only specific creature, as such, mentioned before the flood tale was the talking serpent, whose kind apparently was not taken aboard the ark. Otherwise there were “sons of God” who fooled around with human women, but the Nephilim were not included on the ark (presumably because they didn’t need to be, and seem to have disappeared from the bible at some point.

    God apparently created an unspecified number of unnamed creatures before the flood, to reproduce after their kind. When he decided to kill them off, he then said to Noah: “Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.” That seems to me to be an all-inclusive inventory of what was alive on the land.

    So the question for creationist research is, what speciation existed before the flood? Did “kinds” re-evolve those anti-diluvian animals, or produce new ones after the flood? Was the hyper evolution after the flood the result of thousands of creation events, or natural processes? Why haven’t we observed this process in documented history?

  11. Eric Lipps

    You’ve probably heard the false claims of many secularists who say that creation research isn’t conducted and reviewed. This major international conference refutes that ridiculous falsehood. Of course, many secularists claim that if a person (even a person with a PhD) believes in creation, then he or she can’t be a real scientist!

    There are, of course, conferences for UFOlogists and paranormal researchers too, complete with presentations of “peer-reviewed” scientific-sounding papers, but I’m sure creationists would consider them satanic and their attendees either fools or willing tools of Satan rather than actual scientists, no matter what scientific degrees they hold (and you’d be surprised how many do hold such degrees).

    I suppose a lot depends on who one’s “peers” are.

  12. Holding The Line In Florida

    Well, I have my 7th Grade students write papers and then review them. I guess they are “Peer” reviewed as well!

  13. What a concept. Peer review by people who know as little about science as you do!

  14. michaelfugate

    Shouldn’t it be called Bible science or Genesis science and not Creation science?

  15. You mention Snelling; an interesting case, see here: http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/realsnelling.htm
    Someone called Andrew Snelling really has published real scientific papers, in which he dates rocks to over a billion years ago. As noanswers points out, we are forced to conclude that there are actually two people called Andrew Snellng, with the same name, address, and qualifications, but holding diametrically different views about geology, the subject of those qualifications. Strange.

  16. Richard Bond

    A former professional geologist who makes videos commenting on creationism under the name Wildwoodclaire1 has made a few of these about Andrew Snelling. See, for example:
    (www.)youtube.com/watch?v=7ASgZcUHpt0
    I think that she is wonderful; unfortunately harassment from some of her targets has put her off continuing her good work, but her former videos can still be found.

  17. michaelfugate

    I have a copy of the 2nd ICC Program from 1990 in Pittsburg PA. Gish and Morris were there.

  18. michaelfugate

    You can see some of the Creation Science Fellowship’s (which runs the conference) newsletters here:
    http://www.csfpittsburgh.org/2001.php

    Creation Science Fellowship Principles:

    We believe the Bible to be a divinely inspired, historically accurate book.
    Nature reveals the handiwork of God. The study of natural phenomena using scientific methods, will help us to understand God’s created order.
    The basic forms of life, including man, were created, not evolved, by God as independent functional entities, and subsequent variations of these original forms have been bounded.
    The Genesis flood was a historical, global event.
    As Christians we believe that salvation, made necessary by the fall of Adam and Eve, comes only through the redemptive work of Christ.