Posted on 04/22/2009 1:11:09 PM PDT by Liberty1970
So you are saying that the research institution doesn’t even check with the scientist to make sure they understand the research they are engaged in before telling the world about it! Do you know that many and perhaps most scientists admit that they learn about the latest research from press releases and articles in the popular press? LOL!!!
Whenever I can, actually. Most of the time, though, the articles you post are either unscientific in nature (example: The ICR court case. Incidentally, I spent a good part of last night reading the court papers posted by ICR’s counsel) or based on reinterpreting third-party article without providing original research or evidence (example: Everything by Brian Thomas M.S.*).
Ok, so not always, is that correct?
No, it isn’t. If I plan on posting, I attempt to read the underlying sources first.
You said you only do that so most of the time...is that correct?
Or do you read every science paper (from start to finish) that a popular science article is based on without exception?
Rhetorical nonsense. The only one fighting a battle here is you. It’s still a strawman criticism, and as such, a fallacy.
Ack. I must be getting tired. I misread your sentence. And the answer is yes, I try to read every article associated with a popular science article. Often I will read the larger ones piecemeal. If an article refers to an article as a secondary or otherwise briefly cites, I will only read the parts I need to.
That’s very thorough of you. For my part, I post Creation/ID papers and articles from a variety of sites on a regular basis. I post from these sites because they have shown me time and again that they are worthy of my trust. And speaking of Brian Thomas, he has an M.S. in Biotechnology, and taught science at the college level for a number of years. I have yet to run into a single Evo who can point to where he mischaracterized the claims of Evo scientsts. Where the Evos disagree with him (and every creation scientist for that matter) is when he reinterprets the data to show why creation/ID is the better inference.
“Thats very thorough of you.”
Thanks.
“Brian Thomas, he has an M.S. in Biotechnology”
Source? I’ve been looking for his credentials for a while.
Brian Thomas earned his Master of Science in Biotechnology from Stephen F. Austin State University, TX, in December of 1999. He taught Principles of Biology I and II, and General Chemistry I at Navarro College in Waxahachie, TX from 2003-2005. He also taught Undergraduate Biology, Chemistry, Microbiology and Anatomy Lab at Dallas Baptist University from 2005-2008. Here is his thesis paper:
I was hoping more for some kind of online corroboration. Frankly, you’d think the ICR would post his credentials. Unfortunately, your link isn’t loading.
Brian Thomas, Science Writer for the Institute for Creation Research, will address these issues and more. Brian (M.S. Biotechnology) has taught science at the university level and is a co-founder of the Center for Christian Apologetics.
http://www.answers101.org/conference.html
That one works well enough. Thanks.
No, I'm not saying that. Besides, you're changing the subject. You asserted that the press release being wrong meant the actual scientists got it wrong. I'm saying that's an unwarranted assertion.
Your posts are a mixture of bald assertion, projection, attributing motives to people then passing judgment on those (strawmen), appealing to authority, all layered in with condescension, sarcasm and various tricks to derail/change the topic. Maybe in your perception that passes for a solid science understanding.
What you are doing is apologetics for evolutionsm.
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.