Posted on 06/01/2009 9:56:17 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
You Can Trust a Scientist – Can’t You?
May 31, 2009 — After the flap over the “missing link” Ida last week (05/19/2009), paleontologist Christopher Beard warned about how such stunts damage scientific credibility. “The only thing we have going for us that Hollywood and politicians don’t is objectivity,” he told Science magazine.[1] Can the public trust the objectivity of scientists as a class? Do they get more credibility points than other groups of professionals? Do the processes of scientific publication warrant a higher level of trust?
A study reported on Science Daily may shake that trust...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
I sat in church this week listening to the message and kept thinking, “MAN, GodGunsGuts needs to hear this!”
Well, take some time to listen to what my pastor had to say: http://www.gsumc.org/247036.ihtml?ResourceID=1350&type=0
(The message starts after some statistics were shown demonstrating the falling appeal of Christianity according to polls.)
You fit the mold perfectly. You - GodGunsGuts - are famous on this board for being against scientists, evolution, and ANYONE who dares suggest the universe is a *wee* bit older than a few thousand years. Even when people like myself suggest we should all celebrate the fact we have the same savior, you tell me “NO - you worship a FALSE GOD! You are DAMNED.”
Listen to the sermon. You are THAT GUY. As Talbot suggests, you are better at driving people away from Christianity than you are at drawing people TO IT.
Listen to the sermon.
==The I.D....and Creationists position on science is not to actually go out and PERFORM scientific discovery
Yo Dreamer...Here are some selected research projects that have been, or are being conducted by Creation/ID scientits. Unlike the Temple of Darwin, Creationists and IDers do not shake-down Joe Taxpayer to fund their research. You really ought to consider doing a little more fact checking before issuing public statements that can only serve to make you look both ignorant and foolish. Although, you do it so often, I can honestly say I’m getting used to it:
Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE)
The GENE Project
http://www.icr.org/article/gene-project/
The FAST Project
http://www.icr.org/article/fast-model-for-underwater-debris-flows/
White hole cosmology
http://creationwiki.org/White_hole_cosmology
Proceedings of the Microbe Forum
http://www.answersingenesis.org/contents/379/microbe-forum.pdf
Baraminology Study Group
http://creationwiki.org/Baraminology_Study_Group
Biologic Institute (ID)
http://biologicinstitute.org/research/
Hmmm...it’s kind of hard to take you seriously when a number of FReepers have PM’d me and thanked me for helping them break free of the Temple of Darwin and accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and personal Savior.
You and your obviously liberal United Methodist pastor should sit down together and discuss the following:
Dangerous Turn Ahead: Traveling down the road to compromise
http://www.icr.org/article/4619/
May God open your eyes and heart to His Word. Amen.
Ya know...the crap GGG posts is technically a “journal” too...even a “real” journal..but it’s not “real” “journal”....in the research sense. If you’ve got some great research, a real journal would gladly publish it......I’d guess that the Doctor has a sample size that is too small to make the cut to make a real journal.
I read your link to the microbiology forum and found the articles to be nothing but group think and conjecture. In fact, many of the questions posed by the various authors could be answered by 3rd year biology students. One author was nearly right when discussing the Vibrio cholera bacterium until he wandered off into conjecture at the end of his article.
Anytime a scientist wonders off the actual data, they are either entering conjecture, historical science, or both. The Darwinists do it all the time, but they pretend their conjectures are one in the same with the scientific data. If you have been reading my posts on a fairly regular basis, you should know this is absolutely true.
PS Did you notice the disclaimer at the bottom of page #4. Ever see such a disclaimer at the bottom of a report from a Temple of Darwin forum?
I did. I found it very disturbing that the PhD’s had to write under pseudonym. Honestly, I hate that they are either unwilling or unable to present themselves openly.
Therein, they have my deepest sympathy.
You know that I have come to your support when an overzealous scientist has made broad unsupportable observations. I will back you up 100% of the time when I see that. Their PhD doesn’t make them right all the time.
Uh, you do realise that PLoSOne is a "real" journal, right? It is
An interactive open-access journal for the communication of all peer-reviewed scientific and medical research.
Gee, peer-reviewed and everything. By real science-type guys.
PS Do you hate yourself when you practice science at work? Just curious....
No, I don't hate myself, I just laugh at allmendream for being such an addlepate. Like a lot of the other evos on here *cough cough steve-b cough cough*, it's obvious he doesn't actually know much about science, besides what he's read on a few blogs.
LOL!...Thanks for the new word...LOL!
Addle: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/addle
Pate: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pate
How many genomes have they sequenced? How many fossils have they discovered? Have they even come up with a definition of “kind” they can all agree upon?
That isn't Science. Baraminology is apologetics.
That you think that Baraminology is science speaks volumes as to your ignorance Gutless.
I find it humorous that the guy who didn’t have the intestinal fortitude to finish his Ph.D. in Darwinist indoctrination is calling me gutless. It truly is funny when you think about it. Go look in the mirror and repeat it again. Bet you start laughing...LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
That's funny coming from an evo.
Have scientists come up with a definition of *species* that they can all agree on?
That's because a lot of evos here don't have a degree in science to begin with. They think that they're right about science because someone has affirmed them (read: some other anonymous internet poster told them that they were right)
What stunning credentials.
Good point, Metmom. When it comes to the definition of species, the Evos are still in the disagree to agree stage.
I always admire those that must say that that radioactive half-lives have changed dramatically in the last few thousand years but have no problem accepting nuclear power which relies on non-changing half-lifes.
Yes, I have an advanced degree in Biology and you do not. How is that communications degree thing working out for you gutless?
That’s a B.A. in religious studies and an Administrative Master’s. Unlike you, I accomplished exactly what I set out to accomplish. And given how much you get wrong with respect to science, it’s no wonder you had to drop out of your science program d:op
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.