Mike, you're not even trying now - you're just throwing out whatever trollish comment you can come up. Of course it doesn't mean that. If you knew anything about statistics (or applied what you might know ...), you'd know that even if there is a average difference between two distributions, one can't extrapolate to a judgment about a member of one distribution compared to a member of the other, especially if you don't know how far apart the averages are, as well as what the standard deviations are.

Genome's reference/argument does suggest that's true. And ironically, the biggest dunce in all of science who ever lived then becomes a tossup between Galileo, Newton, and Charles Darwin!

My remark to Mike applies to you, also Gary. That would not be a conclusion we could draw, and if you don't really know that you need to learn some things about statistical studies.

That is what I am being led to believe must be true, but in my experience devout Atheists are the biggest science-stoppers I have ever met. They judge theories by their title and other things that show a total lack of objectivity.

So Brian where are you. I'm still wondering how you were mentally indoctrinated as a child. And what caused you to accept your present view of the Bible and evolution? Hurry we are having to endure DagnyWener's psycho babble.

Gary writes "That is what I am being led to believe must be true, but in my experience devout Atheists are the biggest science-stoppers I have ever met. They judge theories by their title and other things that show a total lack of objectivity."

I beleive all scientists first judge a sci-theory based on title, the title "sci-theory". We can't be experts in all fields. I trust gravitational theory, not because I have investigated it but because of the place it holds in the field of physics. Gary you must do the same thing, or have you done reseach in every field?

[From the admin: Post moved to the inappropriate comments thread,

Gary, you've been warned, I believe, about these blatant insults to people who are doing nothing but supporting mainstream science. You can argue against the science if you wish, but the insults towards the people have got to stop.

One solution would be for you to stop posting here. Otherwise, if you want to keep posting here, behave differently.]

Gary writes, "Or in other words: If you do not have the ability to fairly judge a theory then instead of disqualifying yourself as an expert (like you're supposed to) you use a false-analogy related to gravity and other excuses to justify going along with the crowd that is doing the exact same."

I disqualify myself as an expert concerning ulmost every sci-theory.

Gary this is just sad, "Your intellectually dishonest scientific method makes you an intellectually fulfilled "blind follower".

Gary you cannot argue that we don't all, to some degree, accept scientific theory based on each theories acceptance in the field of science. How many people are cellular biologists, not many. How many people take antibiotics, practically everyone. Gary, if you have ever driven yourself to the doctor to get an antibiotic then you have been a "blind follower". Unless you are mechanical engineer, physcist, epidemiologist, and cellular biologist.

You must be a "blind follower" because you clearly have no trust in the scientific method. I accept the usefulness and understand the process of science. I don't follow blindly, I accept that all fields follow the same basic rules, this allows me to accept concepts and ideas I know little about. That is just being honest. You might disagree, that's just being dishonest.

Gary,

I'm sure those that have been around the forum for a while have the details but I was hoping you could catch me up to speed. I looked at some old posts, clearly you held a different position back in 2006. Care to give me the short story on what changed?

I realized I was wrong, and after being certain that I was incorrect I "self-corrected":

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=839

Then:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=860

Then:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=909

Then:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1322

Then:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1728

Then:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2040

Then:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2043

Then:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2051

And to be even more precise: A theory that I never gave a name to I was working on since the early 1990's which did relatively well with the well educated became useful again as something to bring as close as possible to the Theory of Intelligent Design so those who genuinely wanted a faith-friendly scientific theory worth teaching would at least have that when ID finally bit the dust. But then I became a victim of my own success after finding out I could probably explain what was being described. Then instead of the NCSE, Jack and most others who were trying to end the controversy being excited, I was suddenly treated like dirt. So I saw both sides of the fence, which is why I now have a much better understanding of the religious biases that exist in this issue than it seems, and am very disgusted by what I have seen going on in science and education. Not that all is bad, the theory is still quietly spreading very well.