1. Peter

    I am feeling a little guilty at making you work so hard, but thank you for all your trouble.
    I was particularly interested in Doug Axe and his 2004 paper. My feelings as I read your post was that the guy must have crawled away into a hole years ago. Actually when I started following your links I found he is not only alive and kicking but really a very gracious bloke.

    I don’t get the impression that Barbara Forrest gave an account of him and his work that he would agree with. She was described as a ‘cyber stalker’ by DI.

    I tried really hard with limited success to understand Arthur Hunt’s dissection of Axe’s work. I thought him a fair man. However, Arthur was invited to question the ID guys about this work:
    Axe defended himself here.

    Doug Axe has also produced a new paper which he feels justifies his conclusions:

    I don’t want to play quote ping-pong but this one did make me laugh:
    It rolls off my back. Ridicule doesn’t mean anything – even from people you’re supposed to wear knee pads around, like the scientific community.
    Dwight Schultz

  2. Hi Peter,

    Thanks for the comments about my essay. One thing that I would point out – Axe’s remarks at the Biologic web site do not address my criticisms of his 2004 paper, nor do they touch on the (somewhat hurried) remarks I made at Biola that touch on the subject. Axe focuses more on Steve Matheson’s comments.

    I was then and am still disappointed that Axe continues to avoid my criticisms.

  3. an


  4. Dave Gamble

    Least anybody wonder, according to Google Translate, the English rendering of the previous comment reads …

    “I am God the Holy Spirit. Creation of a manuscript. 13008290590– SMS contact. 2012 to avoid disaster, maybe I can. Come.”

    In other words, it would appear that “an” is either a complete nutter, or simply somebody having a laugh … my vote is Option 1.

  5. Bryan North

    Whatever happened to John A Davison? I don’t seem to have heard much from him on the net for quite some time. He is probably on medication and feeling more rational now.

  6. […] Lies and Deceit: Outright deception (and to be fair it is quite often self-deception), they make claims that are simply not factual. A good example is the list of Peer-Reviewed work that the Discovery Institute lists. Examine it carefully and you quickly discover it is not what it claims to be. Filter out all the clutter (books, magazine articles etc…) and you boil that down to a list of 12. Then examine each of those in turn and you quickly discover that none of them are credible, so their entire list of supposed peer-reviewed scientific articles is actually zero. I blogged an examination of each here. […]

  7. I’m confident that Richard Osborn, past president of Pacific Union College and currently the Associate Director of WASC, will be advising LSU as to a reasonable resolve of this issue.

Leave a Reply