Ok, black arachnid. My response would be to check the peer review process itself. Being biased towards creationism has effectively nothing to do with peer review really, as national geographic and scientific american have been running blatantly pro-evolution, anti-creation content for some time now. This is why creationists have published their findings in their own journals, respectively.
27 comments
This is why creationists have published their findings in their own journals, respectively.
So you don´t dare to give your papers to scientists outside of creationist circles for review ;)
First, National Geographic is not what I'd call a peer-reviewed journal.
Second, the reason creatatards don't publish in real, scientific, peer-reviewed journals is not because of a bias by those journals, it's because most of their "research" doesn't meet the standards of actual science and their conclusions are not supported by actual evidence. In short, they publish only in journals in which the predetermined conclusions are more important than the evidence supporting those conclusions.
National Geographic and Scientific American are NOT peer-reviewed journals, they are popular science/natural history magazines.
Creationism is not science but a religious belief and as such is NOT eligible for inclusion in a peer-reviewed SCIENTIFIC journal (e.g. Nature). How often do you people have to be told? As for creationists publishing their "findings" (isn't "Goddidit" all there is)? Where? I need a good laugh.
Creationists will be published in peer reviewed journals when they have any credible scientific research to show for them, until then, they are nothing but crackpots.
Eden: Better für you,..
Jawohl Mein Herr! Was anderes ist neu?
"We don't know this, this, and this... therefore Goddidit", "It says so in the Bible... therefore Goddidit" and "All evidence is wrong because the Bible says it is... therefore Goddidit"
Read it again guys. This guy's saying that you don't have to be a peer-reviewed publication to have a "pro-evolution, anti-creation" bias.
Even so, what should really happen is that you guys realize that 'hey, our articles aren't passing peer review in real science journals. . . they don't publish anything positive about creationism in popular science magazines. . . maybe there's something wrong with our science!' not 'they don't let us publish. . . they must have an anti-creationism bias. . . let's make our own journals!'.
The point is, if there was just a remote possibility of a smidgen of a grain of legitimate evidence being made available, then the scientific community would at least take notice of ID and look at it with renewed interest. But so far that has been a forlorn hope as the smidgen has not been forthcoming.
Until the day comes when the ID coterie produce some original and valid research instead of their usual rehash of genuine science, then they will continue to be ignored as the scientifically irrelevant creationists that they are.
Do they ever wonder why scientists would actually have a pro-evolution bias? Because they wouldn't, any scientist who found a theory that fit the evidence better than evolution does would become an international fucking hero in the scientific community and be remembered on the same standard as Charles Darwin and Albert Einstein. Maybe the reason they're anti-creationism is because they've discredited it already and it's repeated reappearance is just a hindrance as they have to keep standing up in courts and in the media disproving it? Maybe some of them are Christians and still think Creationism is stupid?
If someone steps up to you and claims something, you might have to disprove the claim.
But after you did that, what do you do with a million more idiots claiming the same? At some point, you just have to ignore them. Those people would just drown you in spam.
The only satisfying solution would be that people educate themselves before they approach you with claims, but willful ignorance is default with many. So, once the level of mental maturity is known, either discuss with people or ignore them.
And this very simple truth about life is not known by the immature minds. And they run around like rabid monkeys and want to be treated like adults, want to have the same voice as mature minds. They just don't understand/accept that it doesn't work this way, then complain that their arguments are not treated with respect etc.
It's a hopeless situation. The only solution is to ignore the asshats. Sounds weird, but just ignore the ignorant.
Also known as the Wedge Document Process
"creationists have published their findings in their own journals"
These journals contain no evidence, no finding through experiment and research, NO FACTS. Just Biblical assertions and blatant lies ("pro-evolution, anti-creation content", that's only evidence you're denying)
You lot have been pulling this shit for years without showing one shred of proof for your side or against sciences. NOT ONE. You come up with something solid, with evidence of your claim, it can'tr be turned down. STOP LYING TO YOUR FLOCK!
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
