Posted on 07/28/2014 9:10:12 AM PDT by fishtank
A lot better than mine! They’re supposed to have had crooked and broken yellow teeth. And those were the good ones! The ones that hadn’t fallen out yet! Lol.
Who’d want it?!It spent too much time up his orifice,the methane gases pickled it.
Get ‘em out of here,they’re not house broke.
Jonas Salk wasn't a secularists, he beleived there was a God. Nice try though.
I only mentioned the Amber DNA as a humorous pull on your chain. I'll remember the sarcasm and/or irony tag next time.
Were you aware of the DNA work done on the Kennowick Man bones? Successful results for $400 when done by the local officials. Fedzilla bureau-scientist spent some $10,000 and got invalid results.
Most scientists believe in God. You don't know that the ones who made the Norwegian discovery don't also. The question, when you talk about "secular science," isn't whether the scientist believes in God, but whether they only seek conclusions that validate their beliefs--as ICR does--or just do science. By the way, this is what Salk had to say about evolution: "Of course evolution is real. DNA mutates, and that makes evolution one of the most powerful forces in nature. But who set evolution into motion? Can't God have done that? I can't stand it when the ideologues take over on something like this."
Yeppers, secular scientist never seek conclusions that validate their beliefs.
Psyops. Whoever controls the terms controls the debate. Using "secular" as if it was synonymous with "atheist" is a gambit to create polarization, in support of false dichotomies.
Dr. Frankenstein: Igor, a little help with the bags!
Igor: Sure! You take the Blonde, and I'll take the one in the turban!
Dang it! Shoulda read ahead...
True, so there is no reason to let liberals control the debate. So I will rephrase your statement to reflect the truth: " Using "religion" as if it was synonymous with "Biblical" is a gambit to create polarization, in support of false dichotomies.
That's quite a bucket of emotional nonsense you're peddling there. Has the smell of flame bait to it.
And an ad hominem is a sure sign an argument has been lost.
That sounds like a prelude to declaring victory and running away.
No, I'll walk away victorious. Sleep well.
And I’ll let you have the last word tonight to.
Sure, sometimes they do. And then their errors get caught by other scientists when they try to replicate the results. That doesn't happen with ICR-style "science."
It’s OK, I still got a laugh out of it!
CC
Please give an example of a secular scientist's error(s) getting caught by other scientists when they tried to replicate the result(s).
Japanese scientist Haruko Obokata, who is accused of fabricating stem cell research, has agreed to retract the papers she published describing her work, according to news reports.http://www.livescience.com/46101-stem-cell-scientist-agrees-retraction.html
The two papers, published in January in the journal Nature, described a new way to turn mouse blood cells into stem cells, which are cells that have the ability to become any type of tissue, by bathing the cells in acid. The researchers called the technique stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency, or STAP.
However, the findings sparked widespread skepticism in the scientific community, and several labs reported they were unable to replicate the results.
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.