We're supposed to believe a scam artist with a psych degree of all things over geneticists and anatomists? Really?
So that's what a scholar is who has opinions outside mainstream academia in your narrow-minded little world, a "scam artist"? Gee, you'd think that if he's such a "scam artist", he'd actually have more than two books published so he could make more money!?! That and he wouldn't wait ten years between books...
Regardless, considering that the geneticists/anatomists you refer to would be ostracized by the academic community if they did or said anything that contradicted the all-hallowed, infallible dogma of the scientific consensus, I'm not surprised at the results of their superficial analysis. Are you? Because why would they want to risk being the target of a fourteen month investigation (even when not being suspected of an ethics violation or misconduct of any kind), exactly like the Harvard psychologist John Mack, who formerly believed the abduction phenomenon to be psychological in nature, but after he started investigating the subject, he reversed his opinion. Not to mention, he was subsequently pretty much ostracized by the academic community for his theories. I mean, seriously, that's not academic freedom, that's academic fascism.
Examples of how little modern academia knows both currently and in the past are not "red herrings". Sorry.
How are they 50 years behind the curve?
On average, that's how long it takes before cutting-edge theories become mainstream, like the plate tectonics theory. (Roughly the amount of time it takes for the older generation of scholars to die and become extinct.)
If you mean they can't keep up with conspiracy theories and delusions, you're probably right. Their brains don't work that way.
So in addition to wearing blinkers which cause you to only see a narrow view of the world, you're also wearing rose-colored glasses in which conspiracies don't exist anymore, as they're just a thing of the past. How cute... But seriously, who's talking about conspiracies here anyway? I'm not.
On the Science board, someone posted a link to a paper by a mathematician, in a fringe journal, purporting to have found diatoms in a meteorite. Do we believe that just because it was published? Of course not. It doesn't work that way.
We? Who's we here? And seriously, if you are going to start bragging/blathering about the "rigor" of the peer-review system, spare me.
You'd do well to educate yourself in these fields before believing any crazy thing.
I'd follow your own advice and quit wasting your time telling it to people more educated on the subject than yourself. And since we're giving advice to each other now, I'd recommend that you actually take the time to study both sides of the subject and not limit yourself to the antiquated, erroneous opinions that somehow manage to pass for "scholarship" these days...
Guilt by association fallacy. Just because they did some stupid stuff in the past doesn't mean they're wrong NOW.
Thanks for the laugh...
I don't rule out the possibility that there's life elsewhere. In fact, I think it's inevitable. BUT that doesn't mean that the Starchild is alien. I've explained why that's faulty reasoning, and the claim that it is alien isn't backed up by the evidence.
The bottom line is the answer to this matter is unknown. But for personal reasons, you've decided you know answers nobody else does and can somehow disprove the possibility some of it's DNA is alien in origin. Sorry, but you're obviously the one with faulty reasoning here.
That's because the evidence is conclusive. The child is human, nothing to get excited about.
That's a lie. And I'd appreciate it if you didn't lie to me again. Thanks.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There is simply nothing here that can't be explained as a deformed human child.
Ditto the above.
Yet another red herring, and you're ranting. There was no doubt that H. floresiensis was a hominid. The question was over classification.
Exactly like this matter, which means it's not a red herring. Sorry.
What you DIDN'T hear when the first bones were found was "Oh my God! Look at this! It's an alien!" like you did with the Starchild. No, what they said was, "previously unknown hominid or possibly deformed human". If Pye was any kind of scientist at all, that is what he'd have said about the Starchild.
That isn't what they did. They obviously thought it was a possibility and then they went and did a bunch of scientific testing before they made any conclusions. Again, stop lying.
I think someone needs to take their Prozac. Or is it just time for a nap?
Surely you can come up with a little better insult than THAT!?! Anyway, I'll be expecting better from you next time... Cheers;)
Post Edited (25-Jan-13 05:16)