Thanks to the Weigand/Maziarka clique for having once again called attention to West Bend as a bastion of 18th century anti-Enlightenmentism. After the Wisconsin State Journal ran the story on Ms. Weigand Debunking Evolution at the Dane County Fair, the zealots at the Institute for Creation Research picked up the story.
Even crazier, the West Bend Daily News reprinted the ICR's "response" for, you know, informational purposes. Not to stir up controversy and sell more papers. No.
Unfortunately, trees were killed to make the paper this drivel was printed on and, while I do not believe trees have rights, per se, I don't approve of waste.
With my professor's hat on, the ICR once again gets an F for intentionally equivocating on the term, "belief" solely for the purpose of misleading the reader.
"Equivocation" is the use of the same term in two different ways, and it's standard Creationist Three-Card-Monty. The logical trick is pretty simple. They fudge the definition of "belief" in order to make their case seem reasonable.
Some beliefs depend on evidence, and some don't. The first are called inductive inferences, the second are called 'superstitions'. Creationists, and fundamentalists of all sorts (whether Christian, Islamic, or Jewish) need to make the distinction between inductive inferences (also called "science") and superstitions (also called "superstitions") fuzzy because the moment you can see the difference clearly, their arguments evaporate.
For more fact-based reality, do check the National Center for Science Education which, thankfully, keeps an eye on attempts to sneak creationism and a fundamentalist religious view into the public school science curriculum... something the Weigands and Marziarkas are bent on bringing about in contravention of the rule of law.
The original can be found, with footnotes and everything at the ICR site. Here's a chunk of it.
A Wisconsin-based evolutionary botanist said that the booth "is a testament to the power of belief and the difference between belief and science." But his statement is wrong, because it assumes that science does not involve belief, when in fact belief is a fundamental requirement for operational science. Prior to investigation, any scientist must first believe that the world operates according to regular principles, that his or her study results will meaningfully correlate to reality, and that there is such a thing as truthful reality. These beliefs find their foundation only in biblical Christianity.
The assertion that science is separated from belief also wrongly assumes that belief in creation does not involve scientific examination of evidence. This assumption is convenient if a person prefers to ignore the reams of scientific evidence that point to recent, special creation.
The claim that this booth is attempting "to debunk scientific fact" is apparently a shallow slander. Instead, it looks as though Weigand and her sponsors actually promote just the opposite approach: Encouraging people to do better science by interpreting hard evidence using common sense, instead of relying on the dogmatic propaganda that is necessary to prop up evolution's failed paradigm.
The only dogmatic propaganda here is the use of badly translated and politically charged Greek and Hebrew to make the case for importing religious fundamentalism into our publicly funded schools.