Re: [asa] ICR's GENE project

I have found it typical of YEC science and history that proponents begin
with a conclusion and then select, misrepresent or otherwise fudge the data
or misrepresent or be selective about the history to supportl the
predetermined outcome. Read the preface to vol. one of RATE for an example
of the science; read vol. 3 of Morris' *The Creation Trilogy* to see what he
does with history. As David B, points out, their approach is the opposite of
that of scientific research, and it is the opposite of good historical
research..

Bob

On 6/29/07, David Buller <bullerscience@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/28/07, David Campbell <pleuronaia@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If they accepted the sample and didn't notice
> > anything unusual about it, or noticed but fudged the data or analysis,
> > then I think one could honestly use such an approach to debunk their
> > effort.
>
>
> I can't help but to think that this would be quite an interesting way to
> test ICR science. Someone ought to give it a go. Pretty amusing.
>
> Also, doesn't ICR remember the scientific method? After reading their
> article, I felt like reminding them that you generally make your conclusions
> *after *you have looked at the data, not before. ICR is basically saying
> "we're going to do the GENE project, and we're going to find out that
> evolution is *wrong*!" Nice little inversion of the scientific method :-)
>
> -David B.
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jun 29 16:27:46 2007