Evolutionary science is fraudulent and/or inaccurate?

But this is the sort of thing (I think) that Scrafinator is talking about. You are accusing evolutionary biologists of making stuff up to fit their desired results. Find the paper that does this Mike, and then you may have a case.
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. Prove it mikeexplain to us how thousands of scientists have reached the same mistaken conclusion(s). Otherwise, all you have done is spout more gutless accusations.

Please, no replies, this is off-topic. --AdminSince, as far as I know, evolution does not attempt to explain none-transitionals (because they do not exist); this seems like a moot point. What is a none-transitional species? What do you mean by "which has not evolved". Give me an example of a species that you feel fits your idea.Here's the problem as I see it. You claim that whenever you find something that would disprove evolution, then evolutionary biologists make something up that explains away your potential falsification of the theory.But the challenge Mike, that Schrafinator has put forth, is for you to explain the scientific error of their conclusions. You seem to be saying that evolutionary biologists incorrectly explain away all you falsifications, but you have yet to demonstrate how they have erred in doing so. Do you get it yet? Show us where the science has gone wrong...that's the challenge. Ahhh...notice how you end this statement with "IMHO". That's the problem Mike; it's merely YOUR OPINION. Schrafinator has asked you (or any other creationist) to find error in the science that debunks you falsification(s). Science could care less about you opinions. You got me here, Mike. What the hell are you talking about? What evidence? And I don't want your opinion Mike...I want hard data that demonstrates how the fossil evidence falsifies evolution. Scientific data.Scrafinators challenge should be easy for you, Mike. It's really quite simple. If evolutionary biologists draw conclusions that you say are false...that they have misinterpreted their data, then it should be easy for you to demonstrate in what way they are wrong.This message has been edited by Admin, 08-10-2005 02:56 PM

Please, no replies, this is off-topic. --AdminFar be it from me to argue with those in authority (), but I'm not so sure that this is off topic. Mike the wiz has made a blanket statement that, at least in regards to the fossil record, science has reached the wrong conclusion. I am simply trying to hold him accountable by asking him to demonstrate how science has erred. I have asked him to find a scientific paper that he feels reaches the wrong conclusion and then explain why he feels that way.He says that the fossil record actually disproves evolution, which should be rather simple for him to support, seeing has how there are likely thousands of research papers from which can choose to support his claim. I have simply asked him to do so.On a related note, what's the record for consecutive: "Please, no replies, this is off-topic. --Admin"? This thread has got to be close to a record...This message has been edited by Admin, 08-11-2005 09:31 AM