Tuppence
Again, in the interest of brevity...as work awaits me, I will say that the paper you posted uses quotes and people in a way to support his position...I don't think he is dishonest...just biased, and wrong. Ross, in his latest book points out in a very nice chart the Ftathers he refers to, with direct quotes and references. Obviously it can be debated without calling someone "dishonest"....you continue to attack character.....interesting.
Secondly, Setterfield and Gentry's work is solid? Come now...I will give you a list of active academic researchers who endorse Ross and his work, can you do the same for Gentry or Setterfield? A LIST OF ACTIVE ACADEMIC RESEARCHERS IN MAJOR PUBLIC SCIENTIFIC SETTINGS, NOT YEC SCIENTISTS WHO WORK FOR AIG, CRI OR OTHER SUCH ORGANISATIONS.
I have asked you to provide me with any corroborative research from the academic field, and not biased yec personel. You have yet to do that. Have you seen tlhe list of academics that support Ross's conclusions? Pretty amazing...in fact, I was just at UCF for the symposium on origins of life. The presenters were VERY secular...Shapiro and others....but guess who was invited....yep Dr. Fuz Rana from RTB, Dr Ross's partner.
Dr Ross is frequently asked to speak in secular venues, I also saw him at UF. He shares his testimony for Christ, his passion for the God of the Bible, and his science. He is always well recieved and his scientific assertions are hailed. That is NOT true of Gentry, and I doubt its true of Setterfield.
In fact, a physics prof at UF exclaimed at the mic during Q&A "I cannot refute a single thing you have said, so given this data why don't more people come to Christ"? This from the secular scientific world.....I seriously doubt Gentry or Setterfield would get the same reception at UF.