Francis Hitching the Creation book's prim...

by qwerty 6 Replies latest jw friends

  • qwerty
    qwerty

    Found this on a News Group. Posted by LovesMeNot.

    Take for example the intellectual dishonesty of using Hitching as their MAIN
    SOURCE of information for the "Creation" Book. It is little wonder they dont
    CARE who wrote the New World Translation or whether or not that man or men were
    even qualified to write it? (taken from Jan Hauglands review of Life How Did
    It Get Here)

    "The embarrassment of using Francis Hitching as the Creation books primary
    reference:

    Brothers, does it not trouble you that most of the Creation books attacks on
    evolution are based on the thoughts and words of one man - Francis Hitching? On
    page 15, par 4 and page 16 par 9 (and in endless other places throughout the
    book), you refer to him as an "evolutionist". In the context of this book you
    thereby leave the reader with the impression that he is a reputable scientist
    specializing in evolutionary science.

    IN REALITY THOUGH, FRANCIS HITCHING HAS NO CREDENTIALS AS A SCIENTIST! His
    education is limited to a "private boys' school in Warwick, England" according
    to his own information given in Contemporary Authors (Contemporary Authors, vol
    103 p 208, Detroit: Gale Research, 1982).

    Despite this fact, the Creation book makes him out to be a scientist of repute.
    Also, you say in The Bible God's Word or Man's? p106: "How can the theory
    of evolution be tested? The most obvious way is to examine the fossil record to
    see if a gradual change from one kind to another really happened. Did it? No,
    as a number of scientists honestly admit. One, Francis Hitching, writes: "When
    you look for links between major groups of animals, they simply aren't there."
    How can a man with a high school education be taken seriously as a "scientist"?

    Further, should we as true Christians not be troubled by reading the
    bibliography of Hitchings book? Would we recommend the reading of such books
    as: Earth Magic, Dowsing: The Psi Connection or Mysterious World: An Atlas of
    the Unexplained? Also, would we read anything by an author who said he was
    member of the Society for Psychical Research, the British Society of Dowsers
    and the American Society of Dowsers?

    Hitching also in the bibliography claims membership in respected
    organisations like the Royal Archeological Institute of London. Did you know
    that there is documented proof of that Society explicitly denying any knowledge
    of him?

    Further, in the appendices of The Neck of the Giraffe he claims to have had
    help from distinguished scientists like Dr. S. J. Gould. Did you know that Dr
    Gould is down on record as having denied that, saying: "I have never met him
    and have no information"? These examples are apparently not unique.

    We can carry on and on: Hitching believes in the paranormal and has written on
    Mayan pyramid energy and for some "In Search Of..." episodes on BBC television.
    Another book of his is: Fraud, Mischief, and the Supernatural. Hitching's book
    The Neck of the Giraffe spends much of its time attacking Darwinian evolution,
    borrowing heavily and uncritically from young-earth creationist arguments. Many
    of Hitching's "references" are lifted from young-earth creationist literature
    rather than being quoted directly from their original sources. These are not
    the actions of a real scientist.

    One magazine (Creation/Evolution Newsletter, 7, No. 5, pp. 15-16,
    September/October 1987) had this to say: "Speaking of the Biblical Creation
    Society, there was an interesting letter in the January 1983 issue of their
    journal Biblical Creation (p. 74) concerning a review of Francis Hitching's
    1982 book The Neck of the Giraffe. Hitching's book is strongly anti-Darwinist,
    and is enthusiastically hailed by most creationists (though he also pokes fun
    at fundamentalist creationists). The letter, by creationist Malcolm Bowden
    (author of The Rise of the Evolution Fraud), points out that Hitching simply
    "culled his information from the creationist literature." This is indeed the
    case: many creationist works are cited favourably (Anderson, Coffin, Clark,
    Daly, Davidheiser, Dewar, Gish, Morris, Segraves, Whitcomb, and Wysong, plus
    various anti-Darwinists).

    Hitching is also a paranormalist, an advocate of psychic evolution....
    [Hitching's book] Earth Magic is a wild, extremely entertaining and thoroughly
    psychic interpretation of megalithic structures.... Hitching also includes in
    his scheme cosmic cataclysms, Atlantis, pyramidology, dowsing, ESP, miraculous
    healing, and astrology."

    Indeed, it is embarrassing to offer the Creation book to the public under the
    guise that it is "a thoroughly researched examination", when in fact the
    primary source for most of its "scientific" statements is a sensationalist
    author with a high school education!"

    Now ...aintcha all proud to be part of such a forthright and HONEST
    organization?

    Qwerty

  • Realist
    Realist

    thank you!

    great post!

    its funny how they always try to make it sound as if scientists would agree with their idiotic believes.

  • ugg
    ugg

    yes,,,thank you very much for all the information....it is appreciated...

  • qwerty
    qwerty

    No problemo .

    qwerty

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    Hitching was in fact a PRODUCER of many of the really wacky "In Search of..." Episodes. His name is prominately displayed in the credits.

    Farkel

  • jack2
    jack2

    Reading Alan F's essays (over at R. Watters site) on the "Creation" book was a real eye-opener for me. If memory serves, he does discuss Hitching's credentials (or better yet, lack therof) quite thoroughly.

    Good post qwerty.

  • patio34
    patio34

    Thanks Qwerty for clearing this up. Now I know the WTS definition of true science that agrees with the Bible. LOL --Pat

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit