Watch for Flying Giraffes (and Convergent Evolutionists)

CEH ^ | January 9, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

Here are the papers. We will be discussing them in a new thread either Sunday or Monday. I’ll ping you when it’s up.

Part I

http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_2/j21_2_109-115.pdf

Part II

http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_3/j21_3_77-83.pdf

[oldmanreedy]

Thank you very much for posting these papers. To which journals has the author submitted these?

[itsahoot]

That is why we don't claim that status of "truth" or "TRVTH" for our theories. And that is a significant way in which science differs from religions, which generally do claim "truth" or "TRVTH" for their beliefs.

You are so full of yourself, and this is such B$.

Nowhere does "belief" enter into this process. And nowhere does science proclaim our data or theories to be "TRUTH" -- that is left for religion.

No you usually disguise that belief by declaring anything you disagree with to be untrue, but all the same, it makes your position true, by default, since nothing else is true.

So many Scientist, so little time

Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age
Russina Scientist say
The earth is now on the brink of entering another Ice Age, according to a large and compelling body of evidence from within the field of climate science. Many sources of data which provide our knowledge base of long-term climate change indicate that the warm, twelve thousand year-long Holocene period will rather soon be coming to an end, and then the earth will return to Ice Age conditions for the next 100,000 years.

I was sure Scientist declared we have man induced Global Warming, er Climate Change, which ones should I believe since Scientist always tell the truth.

[GodGunsGuts]

To the Journal of Creation. Did you get around to reading them?

[tpanther]

And spreading anti-science lies on a conservative website is no way to advance anything, let alone conservatism. Yet we see a lot of that here of late.

If you are trying to establish the dichotomy that liberals are scientific and rational, where would that leave conservatives? I don’t think you really want to go there.

---

You’re among the very guiltiest that I see in regards to “spreading anti-science lies”...and I’m not trying to establish a thing, rather point out it’s you and your ilk that have established a very liberal cult of anti-science evolution on a conservative website.

Ignoring the evidence doesn’t make it go away either.

[tpanther]

That site lacks content. It’s a “sign a petition against Darwin” site, which might feel good, but he won’t read it.
-—————————————————————————————Of course not!

Because if he did read it, he would immediately learn everything you just said about it is complete propoganda! LOL

[oldmanreedy]

Yeah I read them. As far as I can see they're pretty much straight up regurgitated Behe with the mousetrap analogy swapped out for a vacuum cleaner. The author has a particularly atrocious grasp of basic probability theory. Do you want me to go into more detail here, or should I wait for your dedicated thread?

The reason I asked about journals is that earlier in this thread you said that creationist research was being suppressed by "Evos". So do you have any examples of creationist papers submitted to and then rejected by mainstream journals?

[GodGunsGuts]

Wait for the thread. And yes, there are numerous examples of creationist papers being submitted and then rejected by evo science journals. When is the last time you have seen a Creation/ID paper in an Evo science journal? Most Creation/ID scientists have given up trying to get their papers through the Darwinian stranglehold on peer review. But every once and a while some still try. Here is a fairly recent example of a paper that was rejected for publication:

Question to the author:

Question: Have you submitted this document for publication in a peer reviewed journal?

Author: Yep, about 5 or 6 or so. All rejected.

Here is the paper in question:

http://www.iscid.org/papers/Borger_SharedMutations_061506.pdf

But it is much worse than just having papers rejected. Scientists are being censored, persecuted and outright fired just for being skeptical of Darwinism. Take a look at some of the following cases:

http://www.slaughterofthedissidents.com/index.php?p=20case_studies