Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

[Love]

I'm just going to start calling flat out bullshit at this point. Try to float something through peer review without any of that "ultimately worthless" evidence attached. See how that works out for you, and get back to me.

You are not reading my posts properly and you're twisting their meaning. I did not come anywhere near close to saying that any old garbage can get through the scientific peer review system. If you re-read my posts properly, you will see that my points are very plain and simple: (1) nothing in science is taken seriously unless it has been verified in the peer review system, and (2) the peer reviewers are human beings, and there is a distinct possibility that one reviewer of the submitted evidence could potentially interpret it in a completely different manner from another reviewer. To repeat, this is one of the main reasons why the mathematical formalisms in quantum mechanics are interpreted in a multitude of different ways.