Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Virginia-American
Sure, but peer review is not a cure-all. Neither is a non-peer reviewed document automatically erroneous. Galileo was peer-reviewed. I am not suggesting tht ICR is of that level of genius, but, let's face it, peer review can be used to swat down dissent.

I am always fascinated by the use of words like "absolute". I see you have used it in your response and related it to honesty. Either you mean it as a rhetorical device, or perhaps you believe in absolutes? Perhaps even absolute truth? If so, then what about evolution is absolutely true? I submit nothing. It really is a clever theory and nothing more. Evolution embarrasses me much more than does creationism. I have the sense that evolutionists are extremely embarassed by creationists. But let me ask why the laws of nature (presumably including the alleged evolutionary mechanisms) created at the time of the big bang can satisfy any search for, or explanantion of, origins when they cannot have preceded the "beginning"?
360 posted on 08/12/2003 9:19:18 AM PDT by sleepy_hollow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies ]


To: sleepy_hollow
I am not suggesting tht ICR is of that level of genius [Galilieo], but, let's face it, peer review can be used to swat down dissent.

It can be used that way. But a lot of what attempts to pass itself off as 'dissent' is simply sloppy reasoning and ignorance of relevant facts. It would save ICR a *lot* of embarassment if their articles were run thru a BS dectector. It doesn't have to be formal review by a journal, just people with different perspectives and expertises

Evolution embarrasses me much more than does creationism.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Are you speaking as a Republican? I'm not so much embarassed by the creations/ID-ers in the GOP trying to politicise the teaching of science as I am feaarful that it will cost us elections.

I am always fascinated by the use of words like "absolute". I see you have used it in your response and related it to honesty. Either you mean it as a rhetorical device, or perhaps you believe in absolutes? Perhaps even absolute truth?

What I said was "Hence the absolute necessity of peer review, helps keep 'em honest." It's meant to strengthen 'necessity', just aredundant adjective.

I have the sense that evolutionists are extremely embarassed by creationists

Why? what gives you that idea?

But let me ask why the laws of nature (presumably including the alleged evolutionary mechanisms) created at the time of the big bang can satisfy any search for, or explanantion of, origins when they cannot have preceded the "beginning"?

This doesn't make sense to me. You seem to be conflating 'origin of the universe' and 'origin of life', or something.

440 posted on 08/12/2003 8:32:20 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson