Creationist Research Paper

Tags: How To Write A Proposal For A DissertationFrindle Book ReportThesis On Wheat CropWww.Business PlanEssay Community Service ExperienceSample College Essay PromptsResearch Proposal Time Schedule

Suffice to say, the peer review process is not foolproof and has many problems and limitations: Despite the advantages, peer review is simply incapable of ensuring that research is correct in its procedures or its conclusions.

The history of every area of science is a record of one mistake after another.

On many occasions my own submissions and those of others have been greatly improved by reviewers’ feedback.

I have also, at times, recommended against publishing a particular submission—not because I disagreed with the author’s conclusions, but because I discovered false assumptions or serious flaws in the arguments presented.

As Lawrence Altman put it: ‘[P]assing peer review is the scientific equivalent of the Good Housekeeping seal of approval.’‘But unbeknownst to the media, the journals at the top got there because of herd behavior by researchers, not because they are better than lower-tier journals at vetting research quality.

Here’s why: Researchers submit their best work to the top journals, which can therefore afford to maintain their prestige by rejecting, not publishing, many high quality papers. Most of their editorial effort goes into deciding which submitted papers are sufficiently newsworthy.

Critics also claim that creationist scientists do not publish their ‘research’ in the recognised mainstream scientific journals.

And this clearly indicates to critics of scientific creationism that creationist theories are ‘junk science’ because such theories have not passed the normal peer review process that all other recognized scientific research has had to undergo.

The critics do this in order to effectively and pre-emptively dismiss or diminish the arguments creationists put forward in order to support the biblical teaching of a recent creation.

One of the ways they do this is to show that a particular creationist scientist either does not participate in the main stream scientific community, or—if they do—that they do not actually do research in, or are not regarded as sufficiently competent in relation to, the topics that they write about.


Comments Creationist Research Paper

The Latest from ©