This guy -
Gordon
Location: Livingston, West Lothian
has just such a mission by picking on Dr Grady McMurtry and trying to highlight things which he believes discredit the man and therefore discredit his 'opinion' or his scientific reasoning.
I'm not going into detail but I will say this;
Gordon,from Livingston, cites his credentials as
I have an HND in communication studies and an LTh degree from Edinburgh University (Divinity). My interests include trumpet playing, photography, atheism, Christianity as a social phenomenon and historical crimes.(My emphasis)
Well,all I can say is that Gordon, from Livingston, by the rule of your own measuring stick I say you are not qualified to investigate anyone and defame them in any way. You haven't been to Uni to study Investigations and Defamation.
Yes, that's how ridiculous you sound too.
His family background?
His name got me wondering if he was related to Grady Louis McMurtry whom I had heard of as one of the leaders of the Thelema religion founded by Aleister Crowley.
Is it really necessary to attack the guy's family background. It's a bit low. So what, if he hasn't discussed who his father was or is avoiding the subject? Maybe the man is not his father. Who cares? Except you that is.
3 comments:
Gordon replied and said
If someone like Grady McMurtry is standing up in a public place claiming to be an expert, and knowing better than the established scientific community, then his qualifications and expertise are a legitimate issue for debate.
If you read my article you will see that the facts presented appear to be correct and nobody has produced any information that contradicts it.
If they do then I will happily add it to the article. The issue is not whether he is right or wrong, but whether his apparent scientific expertise is credible or relevant to the subjects he is making considerable claims about.
I think his family background is relevant because if someone is brought up in an environment where its possible to reconcile regular science with wildly contradictory religious beliefs then that may have a bearing on how their critical faculties develop.
I read your article about me, but I am not sure how being a trumpet player makes me unqualified to comment or give an opinion on these issues. I have no scientific qualifications at all, but I don't claim to and I don't claim to be an expert on evolutionary biology or climate change either.
_________________________
I replied to him and said
The trumpet player highlight was just a bit of cheeky fun.
So Gordon, by your principle, unless a person has relevant qualifications for a particular field of study they have no right whatsoever to comment, criticise, study, teach or become an expert in that field?
That's astonishing coming from you who seems to have become an expert in personal attacks! Self taught obviously.
As for family backgrounds, that is just such a week argument.
You, being an atheist will undoubtedly have no balance in your appraisal whatsoever if someone has a 'religious' background.
"I think his family background is relevant because if someone is brought up in an environment where its possible to reconcile regular science with wildly contradictory religious beliefs then that may have a bearing on how their critical faculties develop."What a classic bit of snobbery!
Your own family background must have been wonderfully neutral and perfectly balanced.
This morning I was browsing the 15 religious channels to see what kind of warped pseudo scientific claptrap was being fed into the living rooms of the 10 million Sky subscribers in the UK and stumbled upon 'Dr' Grady McMurtry opining on the Earths magnetic field.
I was incensed by his ill informed, and frankly batshit crazy assertions that science proves creationism. I immediately smelled a rat, so I recorded the show and reviewed it with my wife who suggested his doctorate was probably purchased, like so many YECs, from a private institution, probably in Theology (in my view a pointless non-subject, as it is the study of make believe).
I did a little digging, and found Gordons excellent blog which lays out the pertinent facts and Lo! There was much laughter at the foolish delusion ridden 'Dr' McMurtry. He seems to have studied for his doctorate in a period quite a bit shy of a year, while a normal honest academic has to do 3-6 years novel research to gain the title Dr.
He then appears to have returned to his studies for another few months and is magically now a Professor. So you see Gordon's blog simply and elegantly lays out the facts for all to see, McMurtry is a fraud using irrelevant qualifications to push a mentally ill perspective on the credulous.
He needs to grow up and join the 21st century, and stop accusing scientists and rational critical thinkers who base their outlook on hard won facts and evidence, of things he himself is guilty of - specifically of believing in fairy tails, gross delusion and dishonesty.
Young Earth Creationism is a lie. I can say this with some academic authority as I am amongst other things an archaeologist specialising in the evolution of man.
I shall be seeking out and rubbishing his deliberately misleading falsities on the Internet.
My wordpress blog is called Skeptocentric should you care to stop by.
Kadath, You said, "warped pseudo scientific claptrap was being fed into the living rooms of the 10 million Sky subscribers in the UK."
Then you wish to ivite people to your blog.
Why would I read your blog when it would seem you are just another God hating atheist who uses YOUR psuedo science to justify his atheism and disregard the facts.
You also said "Gordon's excellent blog". Really? To me the article was no more than a personal attack on the McMurtry family.
Let me say this also - You are disqualified to call yourself a scientists the very second you dismiss the Bible. Science is knowledge and the pursuit of knowledge and the collation of knowledge. To dismiss the Bible is stupidity. Be honest, your atheism is the driving force in your life and your science. You have an agenda and that my friend, disqualifies you.
Have no agenda, and see where the evidence takes you.
Post a Comment