Original sentence: " Astrophysical Journal, 200 (Sept." Astrophysical Journal, 202 (Dec." Astrophysical Journal, 218 (Dec." Die Sterne, 68 (1992), pp." Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 170 (1975), pp." Nature, 262 (1970), p." Ross has not published the alternative model in peer-reviewed scientific literature, but he outlines the basic components of the model and provides associated predictions for future scientific research in greater detail in his book Creation and Science (Navpress: 2006)."Variable Radio Source Structure on a Scale of Several Minutes of Arc."Verification of Radio Variability of the Galaxy PKS 0048-09.15, 1975), pp.15, 1977), pp.1970 Feb 28;225(5235):832-3.1975), pp.Block, "Unser Universum: Zufall oder Absicht.Cohen, "VLBI Observations of the Compact Radio Source in the Center of the Galaxy.Cohen, and R.In analyzing the online summary of the model, PZ Myers described its predictions "sublimely silly, trivial, vaguely stated, or perfectly compatible with actual evolutionary biology.Lo, M.Lo, R.NASA ADS.NASA ADS, PubMed (This is a commentary on the paper by M.Ross published several scientific papers, mostly before entering full-time ministry:.Schilizzi, "An Angular Size for the Compact Radio Source at the Galactic Center.Schilizzi, and M.Seaquist, "The High Frequency Radio Spectra of Secondary Standard Sources.Stull, "PK 0048-09: a possible radio variable galaxy.with David L.with E.with K
Edited sentence: However, his entire scientific output consists of three co-authored astronomy papers, a singularly authored paper, all published between 1975 and 1977 plus a 1970 commentary to a paper by M.Hugh Ross (creationist) likes to give the impression that he has impressive scientific credentials.Ross has not published the alternative model in peer-reviewed scientific literature, but he outlines the basic components of the model and provides associated predictions for future scientific research in his book Creation and Science (Navpress: 2006).This "model" was later debunked by PZ Myers who termed the model's predictions "sublimely silly, trivial, vaguely stated, or perfectly compatible with actual evolutionary biology"