Saturday, January 26, 2008


This is an interesting article, read it through and consider it carefully.

I am an intellectual blasphemer

One way in which critics are silenced is through the accusation that they are ignoring 'peer-reviewed science'. Yet oftentimes, peer review is a nonsense. As anyone who has ever put his nose inside a university will know, peer review is usually a mode of excluding the unexpected, the unpredictable and the unrespectable, and forming a mutually back-scratching circle. The history of peer review and how it developed is not a pretty sight. Through the process of peer review, of certain papers being nodded through by experts and other papers being given a red cross, the controllers of the major scientific journals can include what they like and exclude what they don’t like. Peer review is frequently a way of controlling debate, even curtailing it. Many people who fall back on peer-reviewed science seem afraid to have out the intellectual argument.

This is also happening in the evolution debate (or non-debate). You are lead to believe that science is pure and honest and, quite frankly, it is far from it. Global warming and evolution are the two worst disciplines when it comes to honesty and integrity in science - there is no honesty or integrity, the science cannot be trusted and the conclusions are flawed.

I have nothing against science at all. Science is not the problem, people are the problem - character matters.

Related article:

Russian scientist says Earth could soon face new Ice Age, Yes, an ice age!

Is milk good for you or bad for you? Eggs? Coffee? Cholesterol lowering drugs?

The answer is it depends on who is doing the study. Character matters. Science is merely a tool, and like a knife or a gun it can be used irresponsibly or for evil or for good, it all depends on the character of the person using it.

No comments: