Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tarquin
The name of the institution is irrelevant: it is the quality of their argument that counts.

Exactly.

And 100% of the arguments from the Discovery Institute are of the worst possible scientific quality.



Demonstrate it. Start with Signature in the Cell by Stephen Meyer, which first rate atheist philosopher praised effusively. And while you're at it, explain why the evidence convinced Antony Flew that evolution cannot possibly explain the origin of life.


Tell me about the Peer Review process for Stephen Meyer's "Signature in the Cell"??

Here's a convent index to many of your most absurd religiously motivated beliefs and why they are wrong.

Enjoy:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html



You really like to double down on stupid don't you? Again, peer review is essentially irrelevant because once again, it partakes of the organic fallacy and very often it works to shield the status quo from disconfirming evidence. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/peer-review-science-wheel-misfortune-160036634.html See also: https://www.discovery.org/a/3835/ and https://www.wnd.com/2007/02/40179/ The Sternberg incident is literally Galileo all over again.

Last edited by Tarquin; 02/29/20.
Tarquin