ICR prepares a fall-back position
A back door to science truthiness?
The July 2009 issue of Acts & Facts from the Institute for Creation Research provides a heaping helping of your minimum monthly requirement of creationist goodness. In addition to the warmed-over offerings of the ICR's late founder, Henry M. Morris, the new issue contains exciting developments in the Institute's educational mission:
The Institute of Creation Research announces its new School of Biblical ApologeticsAre you thinking what I'm thinking? You might, if you recall that ICR has failed to get the approval of Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board for its graduate program for a master's degree in science education (or “science so-called,” to borrow a phrase from the creationist lexicon). Had ICR succeeded, it could have churned out “science teachers” with master's degrees from an accredited institution of higher learning.
M.C.Ed. with a joint major in Biblical Education and Apologetics
Choose from four targeted minors:
- Genesis Studies
- Creation Research
- Christian School Teaching
- Sacred Humanities
They lost that battle when the THECB voted down their application for accreditation. ICR, however, did not lose heart. It filed a lawsuit to force the Texas authority to grant their accreditation and, just in case, prepared what appears to me to be a fall-back position.
If they don't get accreditation from the Texas authority for secular education, why not set up a program that qualifies as religious education, but with a dash of “science” to spice it up? ICR is now accepting applications for the new School of Christian Apologetics. Can you say “yes” to the question “Do you want to use this program's education to better prepare yourself for glorifying God?” (see question #26 on the application for admission). Then this might be just the indoctrination program you're looking for!
If you study diligently, even you might be able to come up with closely reasoned and logically air-tight arguments such as those advanced by ICR's leading lights. For example, just try to refute Frank Sherwin (ICR's Senior Science Writer) when he says (also in the July 2009 Acts & Facts),
Since there is no evolutionary pattern inherent in any biological information, Genesis must be accurate.My goodness! See how Sherwin has us wriggling in the crushing grip of reason?
