17 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayThat was the question. Your answer though is barely coherent and is extremely vague at best.
Which question you've said quite a bit?
If it is why I believe those in science can be wrong across the board it is
because there are people involved. I've said that quite clearly, if it is some
other question ask again.
You are correct people are involved, but funnily enough people will be I gloved in pretty much everything on this planet. As someone who has said they know how the peer review process works, I was looking for something a little more substantive to back up the claim that science is 'wrong across the board'. How has the peer review process failed so spectacular for so long?
17 Jan 15
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou are the one that claims science is wrong not me! Science is a process
That was the question. Your answer though is barely coherent and is extremely vague at best.
You are correct people are involved, but funnily enough people will be I gloved in pretty much everything on this planet. As someone who has said they know how the peer review process works, I was looking for something a little more substantive to back up the ...[text shortened]... is 'wrong across the board'. How has the peer review process failed so spectacular for so long?
that is self correcting, people are bias and hold views that even if they are
shown things that disprove what they want all they need is an excuse to
keep on believing they will.
17 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayYou are a Young Earth Creationist Kelly. You've been involved in 1100+ post thread for a number of weeks detailing why evolution is not true. How can you seriously type that you are not claiming science is wrong?
You are the one that claims science is wrong not me! Science is a process
that is self correcting, people are bias and hold views that even if they are
shown things that disprove what they want all they need is an excuse to
keep on believing they will.
As for the other statement, give me some examples of this occurring, can you back up this claim of yours? Prove to me there is the massive whole sale deception occurring in the scientific community.
17 Jan 15
3 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobScience is a process it is people who are judging what is true or not and
You are a Young Earth Creationist Kelly. You've been involved in 1100+ post thread for a number of weeks detailing why evolution is not true. How can you seriously type that you are not claiming science is wrong?
As for the other statement, give me some examples of this occurring, can you back up this claim of yours? Prove to me there is the massive whole sale deception occurring in the scientific community.
with people they have bias! You seem to think that just because you have
science as a process I must accept you are correct? Others who disagree
with you as it has been pointed out to me also use science, so it is now a
numbers game?
I've been giving reasons for my doubts throughout this and other threads,
it is not a whole sale deception, but it is people attempting to prove
themselves correct. Even here so many have said they are NOT wrong
about what they believe in how they view the distant past, they just cannot
be in error.
You are no different! Before you remind me I am also like that, I'll save you
the time and admit it right up front!
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayThis is just more vagueness and confusion as to what the ramifications of your position are. You believe many branches of science are wrong, not just wrong, but spectacularly wrong. That means we're talking about millions upon millions of scientists over the last 200 years who are, according to you, wrong. Instead of undertaking honest scientific work, these scientists are 'attempting to prove themselves correct' (those were your words). This is a massive wholesale deception that's gone on for 200 years and the biggest failure known to mankind.
Science is a process it is people who are judging what is true or not and
with people they have bias! You seem to think that just because you have
science as a process I must accept you are correct? Others who disagree
with you as it has been pointed out to me also use science, so it is now a
numbers game?
I've been giving reasons for my doubts throu ...[text shortened]... ! Before you remind me I am also like that, I'll save you
the time and admit it right up front!
It's not a numbers game, it's an 'evidence' game. Which is something you seem rather short on so far Kelly. I'll ask again, where's your evidence to back your position? Do you have any evidence? I'm looking for something more than vagueness about the nature of man and personal bias. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJaywhy would scientists have a bias for evolution?
Science is a process it is people who are judging what is true or not and
with people they have bias! You seem to think that just because you have
science as a process I must accept you are correct? Others who disagree
with you as it has been pointed out to me also use science, so it is now a
numbers game?
I've been giving reasons for my doubts throu ...[text shortened]... ! Before you remind me I am also like that, I'll save you
the time and admit it right up front!
18 Jan 15
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobStop repeating what I already said was not true! The branches of science
This is just more vagueness and confusion as to what the ramifications of your position are. You believe many branches of science are wrong, not just wrong, but spectacularly wrong. That means we're talking about millions upon millions of scientists over the last 200 years who are, according to you, wrong. Instead of undertaking honest scientific work, t ...[text shortened]... about the nature of man and personal bias. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
are just the branches of science, the people now that is a different
story! You want to make the people some how different than everyone else
by suggesting what they believe "SCIENCE" believes? Seriously, that has
never been the case, science does not believe anything it is a process the
people believe, they have bias, they have theories! They get things right
and they get things wrong.
I've given you my reason for rejecting a common ancestor, there is not
one thing you have shown me that proves that mutations can and do build
upon themselves to the point of creating anything new. I have already
agreed with you that there can be small changes, but nothing to the scale
you are suggesting is true.
I also think it is very funny that to question your beliefs about this is to
question all of science in yours and others opinion. You guys really do have
a high opinion of your beliefs.
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayScience is a process that produces knowledge based on evidence. Your position alleges that the process has produced spectacularly wrong knowledge for a long time. Can you provide some evidence to back that up?
Stop repeating what I already said was not true! The branches of science
are just the branches of science, the people now that is a different
story! You want to make the people some how different than everyone else
by suggesting what they believe "SCIENCE" believes? Seriously, that has
never been the case, science does not believe anything it is a proce ...[text shortened]... of science in yours and others opinion. You guys really do have
a high opinion of your beliefs.
You claiming that I have a high opinion of my beliefs is a little rich coming from you Kelly. You do after all hold the position the many branches of science are wrong and have produced not a shred of evidence, thus far, to substantiate that belief.
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadWell to hear them talk you would think they know most everything, I don't, but they still have not come up with that simple equation that they have been working on that explains everything.
I wouldn't hazard a guess. But we are not talking about what could be known, we are talking about the accuracy of what they think they already know.
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayThat, at least, has been shown beyond any reasonable doubt. In your usual overly vague manner, you must, I hope, be trying to say 'to the point of creating whole new organs' or something along those lines. If not, then you are outright lying.
...., there is not one thing you have shown me that proves that mutations can and do build upon themselves to the point of creating anything new.
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadBIOCHEMIST ADMITS EVOLUTION IS A LIE!!!!
That, at least, has been shown beyond any reasonable doubt. In your usual overly vague manner, you must, I hope, be trying to say 'to the point of creating whole new organs' or something along those lines. If not, then you are outright lying.
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by RJHinds😵
BIOCHEMIST ADMITS EVOLUTION IS A LIE!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdi3TGd717U
Right after he says he remember looking through the microscope wondering how anyone can believe something so amazing came about through natural processes, and how to him it's obvious it didn't, he starts talking about cognitive bias and how we all see what we want to see. Way to shoot himself in the foot there.
Good one. Thanks for the laugh.
18 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayWhat have I repeated which you said was not true?
Stop repeating what I already said was not true! The branches of science
are just the branches of science, the people now that is a different
story! You want to make the people some how different than everyone else
by suggesting what they believe "SCIENCE" believes? Seriously, that has
never been the case, science does not believe anything it is a proce ...[text shortened]... of science in yours and others opinion. You guys really do have
a high opinion of your beliefs.