(no subject)

Date: 2008-07-08 07:19 pm (UTC)
I'm not a scientist. I have an armchair, layperson's understanding of science, including the mechanisms by which scientists investigate, write about, publish, and accept criticism of their findings. I know enough to look for peer-reviewed studies, experiments that include control groups and seek to eliminate circumstantial "false positives," and studies that lead to more questions.

The body of evidence is heavily in favour of the universe evolving over a period of millions of years. While people like this scientist continue to conduct experiments showing that evolution really does happen, the creation "scientists" are still relying on discredited pseudo-scientific assertions that are thirty or more years out of date.

I respect honest intellectualism. I respect people who say, "I don't know the answer, but i can find out," and I respect people who say, "I don't know the answer, and I can't think of a way to find that out with our current technology." The Creation "scientists" don't say those things. They say, "These are the answers, right here in this millenia-old story from a pre-scientific era, and we're going to set out to prove it." Science doesn't work like that.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
No Subject Icon Selected
More info about formatting

May 2020

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags