Otangelo
Posts: 149
Joined: Oct. 2015
|
| Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 19 2015,12:43) | | Quote (Otangelo @ Nov. 19 2015,12:08) | | Quote (EmperorZelos @ Nov. 19 2015,11:19) | | Quote | | Why should i ? the case is totally obvious to any person of average intelligence and even shallow understanding of the requirements for life to start, your demand is futile. |
You'd save the scientific community lots of work because they apperently disagree with you vastely on just about every point. If you can produce real evidence they would stop wasting time. |
They disagree based on what evidence, exactly ? |
2 lists of peer reviewed scientific research into evolution and abiogensesis
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs.......fs.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs.......erences
Now cite 1 single peer reviewed one that says that design must have occured at anytime anywhere from a reputable journal. |
Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals
http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1290-p....ht=peer
In desperation to maintain the "No god needed" ideology, the faith is supported and filled in by the "No god needed" crowd with unproven hypothesis and theories with fancy language laced with qualifiers such as "possible", "might" and maybe, among others, and it's EXPECTED to be ACCEPTED as gospel. Science says this or that, via "peer reviewed sources", or websites that are held as unquestionable authority, like talkorigins, or authorities, like Dawkins, Krauss, Hitchen, et al. You actually think that's any different than "The bible says, or God says" this or that? Your faith is just as strong, if not stronger, than the faith of the believer, and based on those peer reviewed sources or websites that propose evolution, you base and express your values and principles. No different than the bible believing Christian. That is faith. That is a religion. Just because you either can't see it or are too proud to admit it, it's fact. Atheists try to prove what they don't believe with the enthusiasm of a believer. How much sense makes that ?
Hundreds of open access journals accept fake science paper
http://www.theguardian.com/higher-....e-paper
Of the 106 journals that did conduct peer review, 70% accepted the paper.Public Library of Science, PLOS ONE, was the only journal that called attention to the paper's potential ethical problems and consequently rejected it within 2 weeks.
Meanwhile, 45% of Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) publishers that completed the review process, accepted the paper, a statistic that DOAJ founder Lars Bjørnshauge, a library scientist at Lund University in Sweden, finds "hard to believe".
The hoax raises concerns about poor quality control and the 'gold' open access model. It also calls attention to the growing number of low-quality open access publishers, especially in the developing world. In his investigation, Bohannon came across 29 publishers which seemed to have derelict websites and disguised geographical locations.
|
