quote:
Interestingly, he goes after Wyatt. All do, yet it was Moller who set out to falsify Wyatt's claims. I don't think Moller, renowned as a scientist would jeopardize his credibility by fraudulently reporting his research.
Interestingly enough you are being dishonest here. The facts are that Taq chose to quote a critique of Wyatt because Moller is an uncritical follower of Wyatt, who went out to support Wyatt's claims without any serious attempt to refute them at all. And we already know that Moller's book is about as damaging to his reputation as it could be - given that it is in an area unrelated to his speciality of Environmental Medicine. And that may be the only thing saving him - his work in Environmental Medicine stands on its own, and so long as that is unaffected by his religious nonsense, his reputation in that field is pretty much safe.
quote:
Interestingly, also, is that if so many are so anxious to debunk the evidence why aren't they there to do it fair and square themselves. That's easy. They don't want to find the evidence that Moller produced.
A fair bit of debunking has gone on here. But let's be clear, no serious researcher thinks it's worth the time BECAUSE the "evidence" is so rubbish, and the claims so ridiculous. THe would-be debunkers are private individuals and mounting a serious investigate - one more serious than Moller attempted (which is what you are demanding) would be a significant expense, not worth it when armchair debunking does so much. Ad let us be clear that the burden of proof is on Moller. If he does not haver the evidence to support his claims it is not the responsibility of anyone else to investigate and prove him wrong, it is up to him to investigate and show that he is right.
But as I said, armchair debunking can be done and has been done to much of Moller's "evidence". For instance I debunked the already-dubious claim that statues of Senmut holding Hatshepsut's infant daughter were in fact statues of Hatshepsut holding Senmut as a baby - by finding an almost identical statue of Senmut without the baby. A clear example of jumping to conclusions based on superficial research - typical of apologetics, but not of science.
quote:
Everybody calls for more research. Well, let the skeptics go in and either poop or get off the pot..
Actually we call for Moller to go out there and do a proper job of research instead of just assuming that Ron Wyatt must be right. And until he does produce good evidence we don't have to pretend that he does have good evidence. Just as we don't have to pretend that his book is scientific or well-reasoned or anything other than a steaming heap of credulous Ron Wyatt-worshipping nonsense.
™ Version 4.2
