(June 27, 2011 at 5:28 pm)DaveD Wrote: I don't remember which forum it was, but I've seen the same nonsense from Statler Waldorf before, so you're conclusion would seem to be accurate.
No example given? Lame.
(June 27, 2011 at 5:28 pm)DaveD Wrote: Scientists wouldn't get away with such a popularity contest as there are always other scientists waiting in the wings to rip their ideas to shreds. When such attempts fail, only then is a consensus reached.
Not how science works at all. Appeal to consensus and/or majority are never valid in science.
(June 27, 2011 at 5:28 pm)DaveD Wrote: In contrast, creationists are always falling over themselves agreeing a consensus first (so long as it accords with their reading of their book of fables), then looking for ways to twist or invent evidence to support their conclusion.
I am sorry but this is just garbage. Creation Scientists have their own peer review system and refute one another all the time. In fact, there was an Evolutionary group a few years back that tried submitting a fraudulent paper to the Journal of Creation. They were sure that it would be accepted just on the fact alone that it supported six day creation. The article was rejected because it contained improper methodology. So unfortunately for the Evolutionary group, they only helped to validate the Journal’s peer review merit.
