Science, Creation & Evolutionsecular science and scientistsA number of times various posters request that material be taken from sources that are 'not creation', presumably because they can 'trust' them more. That always astounds me. First of all, data is data is data. It doesn't matter where it comes from. Secondly, there is this insidious little control mechanism in standard science journals called 'peer review.' What peer review is, is takes each article submitted to that particular journal and send it out to two or more 'experts' in the same field for review. I have been a peer reviewer. The good side is that we can check for illogical statements, poor referencing, missing facts, etc. The bad side is that ALL the secular journals and and the two main creation journals ALL refuse articles that go against the views held by the editors and the peer reviewers these editors choose. This stifles some very excellent research from both sides of the argument as well as some of the conclusions that are almost inevitable from that research. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame