RE: Why peer review is vital to the scientific method
October 22, 2010 at 5:54 am
(This post was last modified: October 22, 2010 at 6:00 am by Anomalocaris.)
(October 21, 2010 at 6:50 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Oh really? Like you have any idea what goes into being published in a Creation Peer-reviewed journal. I challenge you to write and article and try to be published. If they are really as bad as you make them out to be, then it should be pretty easy for you to get published right? You'd get rejected.
I am sure I will. The degree of intellectual dishonesty, adherence to notions conceived in the iron age, and the willful ignorance of human intellectual progress since 1750 that is necessary for acceptance by the peers of creationists do not come naturally to me.
(October 21, 2010 at 6:50 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Creationists don't follow the Scientific Method? That's a funny statement since they came up with it. (Bacon was a young Earth Creationist).
Yes, but Bacon didn't live for the two and a half centuries it took for his method to debunk young earth creationism. how dare scums like you claim his name while insulting the potential his method?
