Feel free to browse our blog Sticky Labels. You will discover here the honest product review you have been looking for about Drummond William. If you enjoy our website, then please don"t forget to click an appreciation button above.
GP CHARITY LEG WAX WILLIAM DRUMMOND
Drummond William
If you are looking for a different item here are a list of related products on Sticky Labels, please check out the following:
Frequently Asked Questions...
Why is "peer review" a basis for scientific truth?
I often see evolutionists discounting creationists based on their statement that "creation scientists don't meet the peer review smell test." so is this a valid argument? Here is a list of Darwin's peers who gave him a poor review: Sir John Hershel, math; James Clerk Maxwell, physics; William Whewell, philosophy; Adam Sedgwick, geology; Andrew Murray, entomology; Richard Owen, coined 'dinosaur"; Louis Pasteur, immunization and Law of Biogenesis; and these are just a few. Want to know who was on Darwin's side of the argument, pastors of the Christian church. Frederick Farar, James Orr, Henry Drummond, A.H. Strong, and Henry Ward Beecher, all famous pastors of the day. Now I don't know what this means about evolution, but it does mean that "peer review" should not be the test for validity.
Answer:
The basic premise of peer review today is that anybody, (evolutionist or not) should be able to disprove the findings of any research effort. So in order to be published, you have to show more than simply your conclusions, you have to show a hypothesis and (if practical) a mathematical basis for the conclusion.
Darwin really didn't propose evolution as anything more than a potential mechanism to explain the origin of species. As a hypothesis, it was subject to criticism. But that criticism is not really the same as peer-review as we use the term today.
His hypothesis *has* been backed up through observation, and experimentation. Conversely, creationists and ID proponents have not proposed any testable hypotheses that would avail themselves to the peer review process.
In my opinion, anybody who claims that the peer-review process is tautological (a common 'argument' these days) doesn't quite understand how peer-review works.
