Not extraordinary at all. Try a google search for "evolution fraud" and you get about 9,960,000 results. Use "science fraud" and you will find about 20,700,000 results! Try "religious fraud" and you will get 3,130,000 results. Do you see a trend here?
No the trend I am trying to get you to see is not that there are more reports on scientific fraud than on religious fraud. It is that there are numerous reports of fraud on all sides. There are just too many that are willing to further their cause by any means.
You seem to have a preconceived notion that scientific thought is of a higher standard or more virtuous than others. We are all human and we are all fallible. There are honest and dishonest men in all camps.
Choosing to ignore this, I dare say, is a tad bit unscientific.
Not extraordinary at all. Try a google search for "evolution fraud" and you get about 9,960,000 results. Use "science fraud" and you will find about 20,700,000 results! Try "religious fraud" and you will get 3,130,000 results. Do you see a trend here?
Hilarious! Proof by Google hit counting. Has to be the stupidist argument I've ever seen and I've seen plenty. Try "Christian Fraud". You'll get 17,000,000 hits.
No the trend I am trying to get you to see is not that there are more reports on scientific fraud than on religious fraud. It is that there are numerous reports of fraud on all sides. There are just too many that are willing to further their cause by any means.
It doesn't prove anything of the sort. It simply proves that those words appear in numerous documents. Well, I get about 10,000,000 hits for "alien invasion", and 2,000,000 for "tinfoil hat". How many alien invasions do you think there are?
You seem to have a preconceived notion that scientific thought is of a higher standard or more virtuous than others. We are all human and we are all fallible. There are honest and dishonest men in all camps.
I don't have that preconceived notion. Do you make a point of not reading what people post? You missed the point. Science has a system of checks and balance. If another researcher cannot duplicate your results you get caught, and your career ends.
Choosing to ignore this, I dare say, is a tad bit unscientific.
Failing to comprehend that I have already addressed this point is simply dimwitted. I note that you have still failed to supply a single example to back up your claim. I won't respond further unless you do, because I have better things to do with my time.