Breaking down bad Creationist Linguistics

A quick post for the moment. 

In the "badlinguistix" community, there's been discussion about the spurious claims of Creationism as regards language diversification and a putative Tower of Babel. Whether or not you wish to believe a Tower of Babel existed is up to you; but to say there is linguistic evidence that affirms the Biblical narrative is simply not reflective of the evidence. 

Sadly, it seems Creationists are a lot better than linguists at disseminating information about historical linguistics. I know of no guide for the layman to navigate the coarse waters of Creationist spin. To that end, I am writing some spin control. Under the 'Linguistics' tab at the top right you will find a new Guide to Bad Linguistics. It's a work in progress but so far I have rebutted one very popular article. 

This is not a guide that attacks religion nor Creationism. Actually, I truly believe there is a common ground between the Creationist and historical linguist that satisfies both camps. But when Creationists make grandiose claims about linguistics, well... that demands an answer.