Browse Search Feedback Other Links Home Home The Talk.Origins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy

Index to Creationist Claims,  edited by Mark Isaak,    Copyright © 2005
Previous Claim: CA115.1   |   List of Claims   |   Next Claim: CA120

Claim CA118:

Many arguments may be discounted because they were put together by amateurs who are not scientifically qualified.


"Socrates", 5 Oct. 2003. TheologyWeb forum: Too many fossils for a global flood.


  1. A person's qualifications, although important, are not the only thing to consider. The ultimate authority for arguments about the world is the world itself. If the argument is logical and is based on reliable real-world data (for example, if it contains verifiable data or has reliable references), then the argument has authority regardless of who is giving it.

  2. Qualifications consist of a lot more than letters after one's name. Perhaps the most important quality is how the person is regarded by others in the field. The soundness of the person's past work is another important consideration.

  3. One must also consider the qualifications of others who approve or disapprove of the argument. When an argument withstands peer review, the authority of those who review it adds to the authority of the original author. Withstanding further exposure adds even more to the argument's reliability.

  4. This argument about qualifications, if applied uniformly, would sink creationism in a second. For every creationist who claims one thing, there are dozens of scientists (probably more), all with far greater professional qualifications, who say the opposite.

Further Reading:

Isaak, Mark, 2002. Is that so? The art of evaluating information.
Previous Claim: CA115.1   |   List of Claims   |   Next Claim: CA120

created 2003-10-7