How many times have we heard the following words ? " The majority of main stream scientists ( neo Darwinist's ) believe in the theory of evolution " Well , what we call ....Main stream.....Are in a position to have only their interpretation of the evidence , that we all have , listened too because anything that contradicts their interpretation is not given a fair hearing . Any contradictory evidence , for which their is multitudes upon multitudes , will experience difficulties in being heard through the traditional routes . This then voids their claim that "science will be a force for correction and that is how science works." Clearly , if only that which fits in with their pre conceived and a'priori worldview framework is listened too then that is not giving science the opportunity to work it's way to true discovery , as science is the search for truth .
-----------
‘Science … is not so much concerned with truth as it is with consensus. What counts as “truth”? is what scientists can agree to count as truth at any particular moment in time … [Scientists] are not really receptive or not really open-minded to any sorts of criticisms or any sorts of claims that actually are attacking some of the established parts of the research (traditional) paradigm — in this case neo-Darwinism — so it is very difficult for people who are pushing claims that contradict the paradigm to get a hearing. They’ll find it difficult to [get] research grants; they’ll find it hard to get their research published; they’ll, in fact, find it very hard.’
Professor Evelleen Richards, Science Historian, University of NSW, Australia, Lateline, 9 October 1998, Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
------------------
This person , in the picture , was the Iraqi infromation minister .......He was telling everybody that US tanks etc were not on the streets of Baghdad , just as one rolled by in the background . In other words , he was the misinformation minister ....Just like the evolutionary pied pipers are the misinformation ministers for their philosophical ideological theory.
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/science-owes-its-origins-to-act-of.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2012/01/literal-interpretation-of-bible-is-and.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/05/now-that-is-not-science.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/12/do-not-contradict-paradigm.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/11/bedtime-storytelling.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/06/word-of-greatest-scientist.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/real-myth-makers.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/07/get-closer-to-god.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/lyell-agenda.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/lyell-agenda.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/12/non-measurable-ramblings.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-do-leaders-say.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2012/01/deceptive-interpretation-of-evidence.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2012/01/deceptive-interpretation-of-evidence.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/earth-privileged-planet.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2011/02/earth-privileged-planet.html
http://gen1rev22.blogspot.com/2010/12/what-is-truth.html
No comments:
Post a Comment