Monday, 28 January 2008

Creationists to start an "academic" journal

Dear reader, our blog has moved to a new address.

Do come on over (and change your bookmarks accordingly): rationalist.org.uk

Guardian science correspondent James Randerson reports on his blog how the creationist nutters at Answers in Genesis have set up the Answers Research Journal, "a professional peer-reviewed technical journal for the publication of interdisciplinary scientific and other relevant research from the perspective of the recent Creation and the global Flood within a biblical framework."

They've clearly identified a gap in the market, as there can't be many other academic journals providing "scientists and students the results of cutting-edge research that demonstrates the validity of the young-earth model, the global Flood, the non-evolutionary origin of 'created kinds', and other evidences that are consistent with the biblical account of origins."

If you're wondering what's in store for readers of the Answers Research Journal, James has picked his favourite piece of "research" from the inaugural issue, which details the origins of HIV: "Since the corruption of creation, the corrupted retrovirus, HIV, and various leukemia viruses turn off the entire immune system, leaving the body open to devastating infections. These examples may provide clues to the origin of viruses and how some may have been created during Creation Week by design and how some have been corrupted as a result of the Fall."

Glad they've cleared that up.

3 comments:

SilverTiger said...

These examples may provide clues to the origin of viruses and how some may have been created during Creation Week by design and how some have been corrupted as a result of the Fall.

But if they say the viruses have been "corrupted" and are thus different from what they were when they were created, isn't this the same as saying that the viruses have evolved?

Bing said...

I have started a contest to see who can get the first crank paper published in the Answers in Genesis journal.

For rules, go to here.

For fun, see what AiG says about the contest here.

David said...

"But if they say the viruses have been "corrupted" and are thus different from what they were when they were created, isn't this the same as saying that the viruses have evolved?"

A virus is a virus is still a virus. Don't think that's the kind of evo you're talking about, is it?