Disingenuous Search for Truth in Evolutionary Science
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
There are many double standards seen in evolutionary science, not the least of which is anti-creationist censorship. I'll allow that many of the articles seen by the public are written on the lay level (as are many secular science articles), so anti-creationists point to those and mischaracterize creationary scientists as simplistic. Not hardly!
In reality, there are also many that appeal to those with a strong science background. Want three? "A Review of Mitoribosome Structure and Function Does not Support the Serial Endosymbiotic Theory", "A 5D spherically symmetric expanding universe is young", and a PDF, "Could Magnetic Monopoles Cause Accelerated Decay?" (I seldom share articles of this nature on weblogs and social media because most of my readers are reg'lar folk like me.) Yes, creationists do get published in scientific journals. The point is that creationary scientists are just as qualified as their secular counterparts. Unfortunately, creationists and Intelligent Design advocates are blackballed from publishing material that challenges evolution.
In a tremendous stroke of irony, when Darwin's Flying Monkeys™ swarm social media, they are generally obstreperous, chock full o' logical fallacies — and get their curly tails banned. Then they shriek about "censorship", and commence to using fake accounts for trolling, deception, and criminal impersonation to ferret out personal information from other people. This is done to silence those of us who present the truth.
Yet, creationists are censored in the public arena, so we need to set up our own areas so our side of the story can be told — which often includes information that secularists do not want known because it threatens evolutionism. Interesting that those decrying "censorship" ignore real censorship against creationary scientists. Essentially, they want their pie, and they want a big chunk of ours, too! Quite a bit of effort to silence the opposition to promote "science" and deny the reality of the Creator, isn't it?
The well-heeled evolutionary science industry promotes and protects their worldview, and they don't cotton to actually seeking and spreading truth. Let's look at an example of hypocrisy and non-science from the evolution industry.
There are many double standards seen in evolutionary science, not the least of which is anti-creationist censorship. I'll allow that many of the articles seen by the public are written on the lay level (as are many secular science articles), so anti-creationists point to those and mischaracterize creationary scientists as simplistic. Not hardly!
In reality, there are also many that appeal to those with a strong science background. Want three? "A Review of Mitoribosome Structure and Function Does not Support the Serial Endosymbiotic Theory", "A 5D spherically symmetric expanding universe is young", and a PDF, "Could Magnetic Monopoles Cause Accelerated Decay?" (I seldom share articles of this nature on weblogs and social media because most of my readers are reg'lar folk like me.) Yes, creationists do get published in scientific journals. The point is that creationary scientists are just as qualified as their secular counterparts. Unfortunately, creationists and Intelligent Design advocates are blackballed from publishing material that challenges evolution.
 |
| Pixabay / Charnchai |
 |
| Used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes (click for larger) |
The well-heeled evolutionary science industry promotes and protects their worldview, and they don't cotton to actually seeking and spreading truth. Let's look at an example of hypocrisy and non-science from the evolution industry.
When your view has been falsified by evidence but you prohibit other views, you are not engaged in truth-based inquiry.
In a book review in Science, Marcos Huerta enjoys a fact-free suggestion about the Cambrian Explosion he found in Wallace Arthur’s new book of sweeping generalities about evolution, Life through Time and Space. Shutting his eyes to fossil data, he switches on his imagination:To read the rest, click on "Evolution Is Not Truth-Based Inquiry".