Let me state again for the record: If the data is honestly and exhaustively examined and it shows a result, and that result is repeated in a vast majority of samples, I will hold the result to be true and that truth will formulate current beliefs of reality. What does that mean? If someone proves to me that there is no God, understanding that proof is something outside of us, proof is not influenced by what I think or how I feel, it is objective; knowing that, if someone proves there is no God, I will stop believing in God.
But that goes for scientists too. It's what makes science dependable and based on integrity. If the data disproves what you thought is true, you must change what you believe to be true, period.
We've seen this in the recent Climategate scandal. At least that scandal is finally being exposed so the public can see for themselves what's being done. We also have seen this in the science of Darwinian evolution, which I have written extensively about, specifically in the area of soft tissue being found in dinosaur fossils that are supposedly 60-80 million years old. Scientists say that it is impossible for soft tissue to survive that length of time, even saying they doubt soft tissue can survive longer than a million years tops. Yet when faced with finding soft tissue and being quoted as saying it is impossible for soft tissue to be present in a 60 million year old fossil, do they say "we have to rethink the science behind how we determine the ages of these fossils"? No, they just say "I know it's impossible, but there you have it. Isn't it amazing?".
To provide you with a visual, I've included a link to a video from the TV show 60 Minutes. This dino soft tissue story has finally made it to the main stream...after 10 years! It's about 13 minutes long and you have to endure a Viagra commercial but it's worth it. Watch it with a ear tuned for how they carry out their science. A few notes about this video:
- Jack Horner has been around for a long time. I was reading his work back in the 80's and he's been the leading scientist that supports the theory that dinosaurs evolved into modern day birds. I was surprised to hear him still pushing that theory because I've read that it has all but been abandoned. Read my article called More Scientific Backtracking.
- When the soft tissue find was first published the scientific community's first response was harsh criticism. Funny how that is. Instead of verifying whether it's true or not, the first reaction is to kill the messenger.
- Watch the video, I think it's around the 6:30 mark when they start talking about the soft tissue find; even with the evidence in front of their eyes, and despite their own incredulity, the two still accepted the story that organic remnants that should have rotted long ago had somehow been preserved for longer than many current species have supposedly existed on earth.
Why manipulate the data?
In regards to the Climategate scandal, best case, this scandal means that scientists are manipulating the data to show man made global warming is true when it is not because they want to tap into the billions of dollars in research money available. Basically fabricating a desired result to get themselves and their institutions rich. It's a circular cash-cow. They produce false results, everyone panics and says it's a coming disaster, money pours in to study it further, and they produce more false results to perpetuate the con.
Worst case it is a massive fraud, a global redistribution of wealth that is intended to socialize American and bring down our standard of living in order to perpetuate the communist idea of social justice.
Here is the 60 Minutes video:
Watch CBS News Videos Online
No comments:
Post a Comment