I have meant to do this for years. Today seems a good time to start. We are having one of our early Fall heat waves, and I cannot do much else. The following collection of posts will be dedicated to exposing the lies, and distortions made by Jack Chick about science. Particularly those in his cartoon apologetic tract, "Big Daddy." I recommend that anyone following along read the entire original cartoon first. You will notice that the "art" work is an essential part of his fraudulent presentation of biology, and academic standards. Other people have done critical studies of Chick Publication propaganda. I can specifically recommend, this one on the TalkOrigin Archive, and check out this entire debunking on Rational Wiki. "Punkerslut" had a lot to say as well. I still have a few fresh items to add to the general revulsion caused by "Big Daddy." (Some people do just laugh it away, but I am revolted).
Jack Chick tries very hard to hide his lies by threats of copyright violation. See for example this account of Chick's intimidation. The text that Chick opposed was a clearly legal satire of the original.
So that there is no possible misunderstanding here, I have significantly modified every image associated with the following posts to highlight the relevant features of my critical review (and incidentally rendering any objection by Chick Publications void). I also have the time, money and intention to counter sue Jack Chick for any harassment. I have also backed up the entire site as insurance. I recommend bookmarking Stones and Bones where I will post updates if this site is temporarily taken down by creationists.
The cartoon takes place in a college classroom, apparently at the introduction of a lesson about evolution. I will highlight the specific features of his art, and/or text that are used to misrepresent the sciences, and defame and insult scientists, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Blacks, Mormons, homosexuals, intellectuals and others. It should be noted that the Southern Poverty Law Center has long listed Chick Publications as a hate group, and See Here Also.
We will in fact start with the copyright issue.
Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
The fourth effect tested under the Fair Use provisions of US copyright law is, “the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.” The burden of proof rests on the copyright owner for noncommercial uses.
So, we have the following observations regarding Jack Chick, "Big Daddy" and copyright law;
1) All materials used in this website are original, or highly modified from a freely available Internet site, "Big Daddy," under permitted uses.
2) All materials derived from "Big Daddy" have been legally used for purposes of scholarly critique, criticism, and satire. This use is protected by Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107
3) There can be no "potential market for or value of the copyrighted work" as all material even allegedly claimed as property by Jack Chick, or Chick Publications is already freely available- i.e. without commercial or market value.