In our floating vegetation mat debate I mentioned Steve Austin's other =
contributions to science as being questionable. Here's an example that I =
found at Talk.Origins of his less-than-objective approach to his =
This discusses his approach to objectively assessing the accuracy of =
Rubidium/Strontium dating in the Grand Canyon. Very revealling, and =
rather representative of my experience of Creation Science.
PS I don't want to start an exercise in character assassination, just to =
question the needed objectivity of a high-profile YEC scientist.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">