25 Nov 06
Originally posted by telerionFair enough, Tel. I think I've made my point (about the absence of any p/r'd articles) and I'm sure the feeling is mutual. Rather than having this degenerate this into another mud-slinging fest, you have yourself a swell holiday.
[b]Wow... I find it discouraging, yet quite telling, to have to start off this discussion on the back foot. So not only are these inbred rednecks from DI bible-punching, flat-earth believing fools, they're also fraudulent charlatans? Of course you have mounds of irrefutable evidence to prove it.
Hal, your acting like a child. Quit putting words into ...[text shortened]... ks? Tell you what. Go google it. Don't worry. I'll wait for you.[/b]
Cheers.
25 Nov 06
Originally posted by HalitoseYes. You've made the point that, although you cited several sources which claimed to be articles
Fair enough, Tel. I think I've made my point (about the absence of any p/r'd articles) and I'm sure the feeling is mutual. Rather than having this degenerate this into another mud-slinging fest, you have yourself a swell holiday.
Cheers.
in peer-reviewed journals, most of them turned out to be disingenuous claims, but that, of all the
articles ever published, one ID article was published in an obscure scientific journal and the
circumstances under which the article received publication undermined the very concept of peer
review in the first place.
A true victory for IDers.
Nemesio