Physics proves the earth is only thousands of years old.
- Thread starter peilthetraveler
- Start date
Who elected these determiners, discrediting body, confirmation specialists?
They are self appointed by the group, which itself is self appointed, and illustrates what is wrong with a circular process of self confirmation...
Anyone who thinks that in today's world that scientific groups are above corruption and hidden agendas is blind as a bat...
When science or scientists are the only check on the opinions of science, then you have exactly what we see it D.C. where government polices itself...
Power corrupts, and power has corrupted the peer review process in the scientific groups...
They are self appointed by the group, which itself is self appointed, and illustrates what is wrong with a circular process of self confirmation...
Anyone who thinks that in today's world that scientific groups are above corruption and hidden agendas is blind as a bat...
When science or scientists are the only check on the opinions of science, then you have exactly what we see it D.C. where government polices itself...
Power corrupts, and power has corrupted the peer review process in the scientific groups...
Morons are a great standard to determine excellence. Were you exposed to anything excellent, it would be clearer to you how not excellent every aspect of your own life is by contrast.
In any case, if both a moron and an excellency can see the same thing, that is real fact in plain sight...
In any case, if both a moron and an excellency can see the same thing, that is real fact in plain sight...
Anybody with a bit of common sense eh?
Well actually no. Most people are quite simply not qualified. They don't have the education or training. Period. And that includes scientists outside their field of expertise. Those years of education and research aren't there for no reason.
That is not elitist - that is reality.
How can somebody who can't calculate the amount of paint required to cover the walls of a room possibly be in a position to have an informed opinion on the data analysis from the Large Hadron Collider?
I'm 100% for more and better science education and more open science (eg free access to journals), but it doesn't take away the requirement for genuine expertise in peer review.
Yes, anybody with a bit of common sense would be a change for the better...
"How can somebody who can't calculate the amount of paint required to cover the walls of a room possibly be in a position to have an informed opinion on the data analysis from the Large Hadron Collider?"
So given the corner you just painted yourself into, you are acting on nothing but faith when you accept the opinions of scientists...
No different than the dark ages where the church's ruling were considered above the pay grade of the common man...
"How can somebody who can't calculate the amount of paint required to cover the walls of a room possibly be in a position to have an informed opinion on the data analysis from the Large Hadron Collider?"
So given the corner you just painted yourself into, you are acting on nothing but faith when you accept the opinions of scientists...
No different than the dark ages where the church's ruling were considered above the pay grade of the common man...
Progress is not determined by the lowest common denominator.
If something is a fact easily seen by any reasonable man, nothing will stop its progress...
The opinions of a group of self appointed scientists is simply not a path to scientific fact...
If something is a fact easily seen by any reasonable man, nothing will stop its progress...
The opinions of a group of self appointed scientists is simply not a path to scientific fact...
Obviously there is a certain amount of conflict of interest, but it is necessary and can be no other way. Who other than scientists are qualified to review the work of a scientist? Who would you like to review scientists work? The Pope? This is not rocket science... (bad pun intended)
Your talking to a blithering fool
So conflict of interest is necessary and you call that science?