Why not give lectures on intelligent design creationists for peer review like the others?
You pick outside ID should be taught in science classes but refuse to submit papers for the scientific review process that all science is subject. How can you claim to be science identification when they refuse to use the tried and trusted methods that have led us modern medicine, put a man on the moon and led to improvements in human lifestyles. Until you do your theory will always be granted and that will be ignored. Could it be because their theory have no proof and are just nonsense?
Just to review ... "Pro-evolution":>> that they (Ider) I do not want to be laugh at>> ID is not science>> lack of evidence and concrete (or viable scientific) definition of the terms>> evidence is based in a book of mythology>> Wedge strategy "Pro-creation/ID":>> Peer review does not validate an idea ... conspiracy theories explode ... a teacher of grade 5 could not explain the cosmology of a student in grades 5 ... Kids - we can not seek to validate their beliefs through science, then reject the scientific method as a way of doing science. Peer review is an integral part of the scientific method. Whether reading the study and provide feedback on methodology, accept or reject papers in scientific journals on the basis of merit (and not the author's belief system) or try to duplicate the results, any peer review. Without peer review in science, there are no checks and balances. Without peer review, we all believe we can use cold fusion to fuel our cars. Without peer review, it still would let doctors of blood as a means of curing disease. Without peer review, most the public is generally believed that psychic surgery really works. And faith healing. And the amount of tarot readings. A healthy skepticism goes a long way.
Peer Review TOP 10 Mistakes
