"Please tell us which of Coyoteman's (CP) skulls are false and provide evidence thereof."
nonsense, I'm not the one presenting them as proof.
"Individual frauds do not mean much. They mean that the scientific method works and keeps (or miimizes) bad data."
Then why do you bring up cold fusion?
"Individual frauds do not mean much. They mean that the scientific method works and keeps (or miimizes) bad data."
Then it should be easy for you to prove. But you can't without making huge assumptions which are based on other huge assumptions.
nonsense, I'm not the one presenting them as proof.
But you are pretty quick to dismiss them all as inconsequential. What, exactly, is your qualification for this opinion?
Have you studied in one of the relevant fields?
Or, have you just assumed a priori that there is no evidence sufficient to convince you of the accuracy of the theory of evolution? If so, what is your basis for this assumption?
In any endeavor there will always be those individuals who will perpetrate frauds, because of ego, or money, or whatever reason...frauds with science are no exception...when they do happen, they should be exposed...but because a fraud occurs, does that actually mean to you that the whole of a particular scientific endeavor should be dismissed?
I consider creeps like Jim Jones, and Jimmy Swaggart, and my own pesonal favorite, Benny Hinn, and all the priests who molested the altar boys to be frauds, frauds to the Christian religion..does that mean that Christianity should be dismissed because of the frauds who operate within that framework?
Frauds, in whatever venue, should be exposed, for they do not represent the true nature of that venue...and once exposed, they should no longer be trusted...
The proof has been presented. The onus is on you to disprove them now. Or do you know as little about forensics as you do about science?
"Individual frauds do not mean much. They mean that the scientific method works and keeps (or miimizes) bad data."
Then why do you bring up cold fusion?
The Cold Fusion experiment result was found to be unreplicatabale. As a result, it was rejected by the Science community. Physics as a science was not. By your method, a single fraud is sufficient reason to reject an entire body of science.
"Individual frauds do not mean much. They mean that the scientific method works and keeps (or miimizes) bad data."
Then it should be easy for you to prove. But you can't without making huge assumptions which are based on other huge assumptions.
Again please show which of the skulls presented in the post to you by Coyoteman have assumptions built in. Your layperson's say-so doesn't cut much muster.
I once again suggest, as a friendly gesture, that you stop making a fool of yourself by showing how little you understand science or the scientific method.
It is painful to watch.