Dr. Charles Jackson & The Clergy Letter’s Abbie Smith Debates on YouTube
Two clips from last week’s debate between the Creation Truth Foundation‘s Dr. Charles Jackson and evolution advocate Abbie Smith have been posted on YouTube.
The first is 4 minutes 2 seconds, entitled ERVS different or identical? 4500 people have already seen Abbie Smith caught misquoting a scientific paper on tape. (She says the two lemur ERVs in the study were very different, whereas I quote the exact text of the report, which says they are “nearly identical.”)
web address: http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=RxqK7I168Vc
The second clip is only 2 min 14 sec, entitled “Dr J on the Origin of Life” at this address:
web address: http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=r5D2zm87bVo
You guys should really watch this! Abbie Smith isn’t just any ol’ evolutionist. She is one of the two science reference persons in Oklahoma for the “Clergy Letter Project.”
You can help Dr. Jackson and the folks over at Creation Truth Foundation by hitting these YouTubes.
In Christ the Creator,
Rev Anthony W Breeden
creationletter.com
The Creation Letter 
thank you for this post.
mcoville,
It looks like Abbie had a video cameraman on site and he’s put the whole debate on YouTube in about 20 segments:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=rattrap3&view=videos
-Rev Anthony W Breeden
creationletter.com
Thanks for pointing out this error. Abbie performed so poorly in the debate that she is likely regretting not taking the advice of her evolutionist mentors to not participate in organized public debates with evolutionary skeptics. Said advice is documented in my post on this very interesting debate (thanks to Dr. Jackson), Why evolutionists won’t debate creationists: review of Abbie Smith versus Dr. Charles Jackson debate
I was at the “debate” and feel that the discussion was approached from two totally different perspective. Dr. Jackson was clearly was organized in presenting his view in a public forum. Abbie Smith was not experienced in this technique and she said that this was her first time to do one of these. Smith’s POV deals with her experience with her work and knowledge that she has garnered her academic career, which is still in progress. Smith is doing first hand original research, and Dr. Jackson reads and interprets other peoples work from his own point of view. While both ways of gaining knowledge is legitimate, only one provides the first hand understanding of the processes involved to created the research. Without knowing the processes and the limits and concepts designed to set up the research, one may miss understand what the results mean in any certain set of experiments. Keep this in mind, science is hard. If it was easy it would be on daytime TV instead of the mindless talk shows and soap operas we have now.
There is much about science I do not understand but I do have a good understanding how to understand the scientific method. The highest level of science I have studied was Organic Chemistry and Physics.
I would say that the debate, such as it was, was indeed won by Dr. Jackson. But that is because he is more trained in these sorts of presentations. Plus, I advised Abbie Smith NOT to do any more debates because all creationist do is find areas of weakness in science and try to exploit that to mean that their perspective is correct. The good thing about science is that it doesn’t require those that study it and follow it to have all the answers.