Please, no replies, this is off-topic. --Admin
Fliesonly suggested this was the crux of your challenge to creos...
By simply claiming that scientists reach faulty conclusions due to a misinterpretation of the data is a rather bold thing to say and is the crux of schrafinators challenged.
Is this true? If so, how do you handle the hypocrisy of making such a challenge when you yourself opened a thread in the Coffee House suggesting that no one can be unbiased in appraising research, which one can only logically assume stretches to creating research as well?
Indeed, you have twice insinuated I must be lying when I said I (or anyone else) can stick to appropriate methodology even if I don't like the conclusion of the research.
It appears that if your coffee house topic is honest, then you should agree that evolutionists will likely create and the reviewers errantly support evolutionary theory driven research due to less than 100% nonbias.
Or are you drawing a distinction between research in social sciences versus theoretical physical sciences? If so, please explain what that distinction is. As far as I understand, methodology is methodology.
This message has been edited by Admin, 08-10-2005 02:26 PM
holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)