@wandeljw,
In this month's EARTH magazine is an article entitled "Creationism Creeps into Conferences"
Summarizing, the article was about the 2010 Geological Society of AMerica Annual Conference that was held in Denver this past year. There were several field trips and these field trips are , apparently, not peer reviewed because, someone would have to drive all over the trip rpoute and concur or not with the trip data and conclusions. (Afetr all, most field trips are rehashing of field sites that are well known to locals but may be new stuff to foreign or distant scientists. The deal was that several "Creationist Geologists" sponsored several field trips which were solidly attended. (When you look at the field trip abatract the terms and descriptions are fairly main stream).
WELL, when the boys got our in the field, they were quick to dispense with their Creationsit terms or "Flood termonologfy" or even "references to the week pf Creations'. Instead, the leaders, CReationists all, referred to data as "Obviously catastrophically emplaced or depositede". No mention was made of anytthing that smacked of a compressed geological time scale.
SO, the events were, studied in the field and presented as typical geological sections withjout any Biblical Inyerpretations. Only after all the field trips broke up did the GSA learn that several of the field trip leaders were writing their literature contributions as being "GSA peer reviewed' . The Institute of Creation Research ran a headline in its newsletter that said"Christian Geologists were Influential at GEological SOciety Conference"
A sereis of cheap tricks but clever nonetheless. I have to applaud these guys for constantly coming up with new ways to give their nonsense an air of credibility.
