waves said:
lessismore said:
waves said:
Xerbia said: https://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/08/02/500-renowned-scientists-jointly-share-why-they-reject-darwins-theory-of-evolution/
Interesting to see so many scientists changing their mind on the theory of evolution. Really gets your mind thinking about other ideas. Great topic to think about on some shroomies 
Anybody who believes anything they read on that website is an idiot. Sorry, but there is no nicer way of saying it.
Do not judge, so you will not be judged.
Quote: Here’s another great quote from one of the scientists, Chris Williams, A Ph.D., Biochemistry Ohio State University:
Is this one of the supposedly "renowned scientists"? Some totally unknown guy who happens to have a Ph.D from Ohio State?
Having a Ph.D DOES NOT make you a "renowned scientist".
That quote from 'Chris Williams' (if that is even a real person) is over 10 years old. So are all the other quotes on the website referenced (https://dissentfromdarwin.org/scientists/)
Sorry, not trying to be a dick. It's just pretty obvious that the original article and the website it is referencing are a complete load of bullshit.
And it's not even fresh bullshit. This garbage has been sitting on the internet for 10 years now.
I would make the claim that even renowned scientists you can not trust. They often in for the money, the fame.
In fact many professional scientists are reputation building grabtailing weasels (copyright Mckenna).
That's how they get big in this world.
You can not trust any man, fully, but yourself. Not scientists eithr.
No matter how many clap him on the back, and fancy journals.
My friend, journals are faked all the time, even bought.
And if it is popular, I would not trust it either.... nature.com? Oh comeon.
Trust not popular things. The more popular, the more deceitful often. Popular is often a moneygame.
In fact I trust often less popular journals than popular ones.
Arxiv.org is wonderful, and many humble phds use it. They are not the weasels spoken of here, but truth is many scientists are weasels.
You can be an egoist, as a builder, as a scientist, or as a religious person.
Trust never any person fully, or any theory fully, or any science journal fully.
Unless said agrees with your own reasoning, even there be careful, for you could be wrong.
Man is often so far from God, he can not see very much at all. Religious blindness. Spiritual blindness. Scientific blindness. Political blindness. Society blindness.
I would truthfully not trust any science field fully, neither our public school systems, nor educations/universities.
Nothing can be trusted fully.
Be careful with swearwords like bullshit, by using them you cause a distance to the one you are talking to, and thus no longer fully objective.
Nothing is bullshit unless it can be proven. Your argument seems to have failed to me. The guy has a phd, and unless you have called the university, you have failed your argument here. Because you can not verify it online likely, if his phd is for real, or if his university is credited.
Hey fake universities are hard to spot.
Argumenting a phd is fake online, is a very hard thing to do, most uni people know.
And what university is credible? - someclaim they better for being from Harvard
Oh come on
Harvard, that is some pumped up egocentrical bullshit often I would say, many go there only for the prestige
A phd is a phd, if it is a real phd, usually
Prestige is for sure no guarantee.
You can not measure on a status title, if the professors are good teachers. The harvard ones may be the good/bad ones.
You can learn much or nothing with a phd.
But because it is a foreign (to you) university, does not mean it is bullshit.
If you do intl research, then a phd is a phd. You be accepted on the team. If your phd is a real one, from accredited university.
But then I again don't think you can know, unless calling in, and doing extensive research, the 2-5mins you used, I would not count as credible, to know if the phd/university is fake/accredited at all.
As said, it can be very hard to know,fake unis pop up all over the place.
I would give the guy the benefit of the doubt, unless I had real hard physical evidence. After all he says truth: evolution is not steadyfast.
It just a theory, like any other theory.
|