But on Tuesday, the good doctor threw out this whopper:
The last known dinosaur that can be documented living with people was in 1887. This was down in Bolivia, when a small armored dinosaur was killed.Well, that's a new one for me! I scoured the Internets (OK, I just did some mild searching), but couldn't find anyone else making this claim. Perhaps Grady is confusing "small armored dinosaur" with an armadillo.
So, I hope Dutko and McMurtry fans will please point me towards this "documentation." I'm dying to see it.
9 comments:
I wonder how many of McMurtry's fans realise that his father was a leading occultist?
Typical of McMurtry's dishonesty is a statement he made several years ago when discussing Louis Pasteur's experiment in which he allowed a piece of meat to rot in order to examine any possible emergence of new life. I state this from memory and may be off on some details.
I do, though, accurately recall McMurtry's chest-pounding summary of the experiment. "Pasteur proved it can't happen (life emernging from non-life)" No, Grady, he did not prove that at all. All he showed is that it did not happen in that instance -- and nothing more. Pasteur did not, and neither can anyone else, prove an unbounded negative. You can't prove there is no Santa Clause. That's logic 101. Got that Grady and Bob?
Grady porports to be a creation "scientist" yet no "real" scientist would make such a blatently inaccurate, irresponsible statement.
Grady and Bob often take advantage of the fact that the general public is hopelessly uninfomred in matters of science. Only about 18% of the public can correctly describe a molecue and only 50% know the earth circles the sun annually.
Neither Bob or his audience would catch McMurtry's blunder, but an estute sceince editor would. That, I wish Bob understood, is why "real" scientists are quoted in the media and creation "scientists" are duly and properly ignored.
I call him Dr. awkward pause. He is a Snarky ologist, who gives attitude to everyone who calls in, even the ones who are stupid enough to agree with him
He says it was in Scientific American that this Bolivian dinosaur was documented in, if that helps.
I wonder if Mcmurtry knows he is not a scientist, and just hope's everyone will believe he is if he keeps refering to himself as such, or is he so delusional that he has actually come to believe himself a scientist.
Hey let's not be too harsh on Grady. Think of all the cereal he had to eat just to accumulate enough box tops to send away for his diploma in " scientifical stuff".
Reply to Jon....
Yes he did quote a source in mentioning "Sceintific American," but it would have been so easy to make the citation useful in giving the year and month.
He did not do that, so he gets the "credit" -- as you gave him -- for the reference, but made it nearly impossilbe for me to look it up and get the whole story.
Don't forget, Buckaroos and Dutko fans, the truth, cleverly told is the biggest lie of all.
I heard that bit about Scientific American, but I couldn't find anything about a dinosaur living with people in 1887. However, I did find an article on their website entitled 15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense. Bob should probably read it. But he won't.
Here is the reference to Scientific American. Its 1883 not 1887:
"A Bolivian Saurian," Scientific American, 49:3, 1883
Post a Comment