Darwin vs DNA

[Youwerecreated]

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

 

[Hollie]

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

I addressed one of the claims in the volumes of material you cut and pasted and you ran for the exits when the "scientific miracle" was dismantled.

What's laughabe is that you address nothing except by way of spamming when you cut and paste the same nonsense multiple times.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are not discussing science, only ID and creationism masquerading other than what they are: belief systems without scientific foundation. You sound as goofy as The Irish Ram.

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

 

[CandySlice]

You are not discussing science, only ID and creationism masquerading other than what they are: belief systems without scientific foundation. You sound as goofy as The Irish Ram.

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

Im sorry, YWC but none of your THEORIES are any more provable than mine are. The difference being I won't threaten to beat you up if you don't believe me

 

[The Irish Ram]

Show us the biblical evidence (the controlled scientific experiments and their results) for 'rolled up dimensions." Please.

I already have. Anything you can't explain away, you ignore, and role out the insults.
Again:
There are 16 verses in the Bible concerning rolling up dimensions. I've listed several. Jesus proved there were six dimensions. Your scientists took this long to confirm it. This long dude, before we started to figure out that there are more than 4 dimensions. Isaiah knew it 3,000 years before you did. And you're "evolved".
You have offered absolutely nothing to refute what I have said.

Here, let Wikipedia help you:

Additional dimensions
In physics, three dimensions of space and one of time is the accepted norm. There are theories that try to unify different forces and such—these theories require more dimensions. Superstring theory, M-theory and Bosonic string theory respectively posit that physical space has 10, 11 and 24 dimensions. These extra dimensions are said to be spatial. However, we perceive only three spatial dimensions and, to date, no experimental or observational evidence is available to confirm the existence of these extra dimensions. A possible explanation that has been suggested is that space acts as if it were "curled up" in the extra dimensions on a subatomic scale, possibly at the quark/string level of scale or below.
They are right.
If there was no God to reveal that little bit of scientific insight to Isaiah, then how did Isaiah know?
Was the orb thing a lucky guess?
How many co-incidences is it going to take before you understand that the same being that authored the creation of the universes authored the book that explains it? Explain how He hasn't been wrong yet.

You think Hawking is a big deal? Einstein? If they were really smart they would have done the same thing Nachmanides did in the 13th century for God's sake, and saved them selves some work.
Eight hundred years ago, Nachmanides attained this insight from the Torah's use of the phrase, "Day One." And that's exactly what Einstein taught us in the Laws of Relativity: that there was a creation, not just of space and matter, but of time itself.
YOUR scientists proving creation. I love it.
Grow up.

 

[Hollie]

Show us the biblical evidence (the controlled scientific experiments and their results) for 'rolled up dimensions." Please.

I already have. Anything you can't explain away, you ignore, and role out the insults.
Again:
There are 16 verses in the Bible concerning rolling up dimensions. I've listed several. Jesus proved there were six dimensions. Your scientists took this long to confirm it. This long dude, before we started to figure out that there are more than 4 dimensions. Isaiah knew it 3,000 years before you did. And you're "evolved".
You have offered absolutely nothing to refute what I have said.

Here, let Wikipedia help you:

Additional dimensions
In physics, three dimensions of space and one of time is the accepted norm. There are theories that try to unify different forces and such—these theories require more dimensions. Superstring theory, M-theory and Bosonic string theory respectively posit that physical space has 10, 11 and 24 dimensions. These extra dimensions are said to be spatial. However, we perceive only three spatial dimensions and, to date, no experimental or observational evidence is available to confirm the existence of these extra dimensions. A possible explanation that has been suggested is that space acts as if it were "curled up" in the extra dimensions on a subatomic scale, possibly at the quark/string level of scale or below.
They are right.
If there was no God to reveal that little bit of scientific insight to Isaiah, then how did Isaiah know?
Was the orb thing a lucky guess?
How many co-incidences is it going to take before you understand that the same being that authored the creation of the universes authored the book that explains it? Explain how He hasn't been wrong yet.

You think Hawking is a big deal? Einstein? If they were really smart they would have done the same thing Nachmanides did in the 13th century for God's sake, and saved them selves some work.
Eight hundred years ago, Nachmanides attained this insight from the Torah's use of the phrase, "Day One." And that's exactly what Einstein taught us in the Laws of Relativity: that there was a creation, not just of space and matter, but of time itself.
YOUR scientists proving creation. I love it.
Grow up.

You seem to have convinced yourself to 100% certainty with 0% evidence that there are multiple "rolled up" dimensions.

People convince themselves of many things when they have a need and a desire to believe in the supernatural. If there is one thing that is certain, it is that closer examination of anything will always lead to differentiable aspects. Gods have a tendency to breed when placed in philosophical intercourse with men.

I've seen this exercise repeatedly whereby apologists will play fast and loose with allegorical interpretations of the bible while entirely dodging the fundamental problem that none of these claims are demonstrable in any meaningful way. Is that why people are forced to use cutting and pasting from Wiki as their primary source for science education?

 

[ima]

Since I don't have enough faith to be an evolutionist, would those of you who believe in evolution explain how a random bang created an extremely complex DNA language with 3 billion genetic letters that actually store information in the form of a four-character digital code?

Clearly you don't understand evolution. Try taking a class before asking a loaded question that screams "I have no idea what I'm talking about".

How about screaming me an answer, better yet, since you have had billions of years to evolve, create a digital code with 3 billion genetic letters. If soup can do it and you are so farther along now than soup was then, pony up.

You're assuming that because you don't know and/or understand the scientific explanation of evolution and how life started, that it must have been a magic feat performed by an invisible superbeing. There is, as of now, no solid proof for such a theory. IF there is such an invisible superbeing, it appears to me that evolution is part of its plan.
I mean, let's face it, the world wasn't made in six days either, our powerful telescopes confirm that planetary systems don't form that fast. Isn't that part of "scientists proving creation. I love it."? Or are you a delusional cherry picker who pretends to have already figured out the universe and everything in it?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

I addressed one of the claims in the volumes of material you cut and pasted and you ran for the exits when the "scientific miracle" was dismantled.

What's laughabe is that you address nothing except by way of spamming when you cut and paste the same nonsense multiple times.

You are gonna have to point that out to me.

 

[Hollie]

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

I addressed one of the claims in the volumes of material you cut and pasted and you ran for the exits when the "scientific miracle" was dismantled.

What's laughabe is that you address nothing except by way of spamming when you cut and paste the same nonsense multiple times.

You are gonna have to point that out to me.

It was in connection with your silly claim to the biblical miracle of ocean springs.

You should not take my response as a reason to again cut and paste half the contents of Harun Yahya's website.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You are not discussing science, only ID and creationism masquerading other than what they are: belief systems without scientific foundation. You sound as goofy as The Irish Ram.

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

I have opened the subject of cells and mutations to you and that is not science ? I have pointed out things that the bible claims and is supported by science. I posted a video to you once again you do not respond to the scientific questions raised.If I didn't know any better you want to discuss philosophy not science.

What I thought was really funny that you would deny that many assertions of the bible are scientific in nature and claim they are philosophy.

Springs in the oceans,man made from the dust of the ground,man made of things indiscernible to our eyes but can only be viewed through a microscope et cetera et cetra.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You are not discussing science, only ID and creationism masquerading other than what they are: belief systems without scientific foundation. You sound as goofy as The Irish Ram.

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

Im sorry, YWC but none of your THEORIES are any more provable than mine are. The difference being I won't threaten to beat you up if you don't believe me

Another cheap shot,that is usually what happens when you have nothing really to say. No he started the threat a while back and I grew tired of his personal insults so yeah I challenged him to a boxing match. You don't have to agree with me I am ok with that but leave the personal insults alone.

I have found very few in this forum that can discuss science especially from your side you resort to rhetoric. My views on mutations are not scientific ? My views on genetics are not scientific ? By all means please point the way.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Show us the biblical evidence (the controlled scientific experiments and their results) for 'rolled up dimensions." Please.

I already have. Anything you can't explain away, you ignore, and role out the insults.
Again:
There are 16 verses in the Bible concerning rolling up dimensions. I've listed several. Jesus proved there were six dimensions. Your scientists took this long to confirm it. This long dude, before we started to figure out that there are more than 4 dimensions. Isaiah knew it 3,000 years before you did. And you're "evolved".
You have offered absolutely nothing to refute what I have said.

Here, let Wikipedia help you:

Additional dimensions
In physics, three dimensions of space and one of time is the accepted norm. There are theories that try to unify different forces and such—these theories require more dimensions. Superstring theory, M-theory and Bosonic string theory respectively posit that physical space has 10, 11 and 24 dimensions. These extra dimensions are said to be spatial. However, we perceive only three spatial dimensions and, to date, no experimental or observational evidence is available to confirm the existence of these extra dimensions. A possible explanation that has been suggested is that space acts as if it were "curled up" in the extra dimensions on a subatomic scale, possibly at the quark/string level of scale or below.
They are right.
If there was no God to reveal that little bit of scientific insight to Isaiah, then how did Isaiah know?
Was the orb thing a lucky guess?
How many co-incidences is it going to take before you understand that the same being that authored the creation of the universes authored the book that explains it? Explain how He hasn't been wrong yet.

You think Hawking is a big deal? Einstein? If they were really smart they would have done the same thing Nachmanides did in the 13th century for God's sake, and saved them selves some work.
Eight hundred years ago, Nachmanides attained this insight from the Torah's use of the phrase, "Day One." And that's exactly what Einstein taught us in the Laws of Relativity: that there was a creation, not just of space and matter, but of time itself.
YOUR scientists proving creation. I love it.
Grow up.

Funny how they think we are nuts and they can't follow along with what we post whether in our words or someone elses words. It's like they close their eyes and hope we don't notice their lack of a response.

There is so much information in the bible confirming a higher power and they just don't get it or they ignore it. Heck science came from people of faith. We want to know how God did it,they want to find a way it could of happened without God and that is why it's pretty easy to shoot down most theories that are the product of a vivid imagination and conjecture.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Show us the biblical evidence (the controlled scientific experiments and their results) for 'rolled up dimensions." Please.

I already have. Anything you can't explain away, you ignore, and role out the insults.
Again:
There are 16 verses in the Bible concerning rolling up dimensions. I've listed several. Jesus proved there were six dimensions. Your scientists took this long to confirm it. This long dude, before we started to figure out that there are more than 4 dimensions. Isaiah knew it 3,000 years before you did. And you're "evolved".
You have offered absolutely nothing to refute what I have said.

Here, let Wikipedia help you:

Additional dimensions
In physics, three dimensions of space and one of time is the accepted norm. There are theories that try to unify different forces and such—these theories require more dimensions. Superstring theory, M-theory and Bosonic string theory respectively posit that physical space has 10, 11 and 24 dimensions. These extra dimensions are said to be spatial. However, we perceive only three spatial dimensions and, to date, no experimental or observational evidence is available to confirm the existence of these extra dimensions. A possible explanation that has been suggested is that space acts as if it were "curled up" in the extra dimensions on a subatomic scale, possibly at the quark/string level of scale or below.
They are right.
If there was no God to reveal that little bit of scientific insight to Isaiah, then how did Isaiah know?
Was the orb thing a lucky guess?
How many co-incidences is it going to take before you understand that the same being that authored the creation of the universes authored the book that explains it? Explain how He hasn't been wrong yet.

You think Hawking is a big deal? Einstein? If they were really smart they would have done the same thing Nachmanides did in the 13th century for God's sake, and saved them selves some work.
Eight hundred years ago, Nachmanides attained this insight from the Torah's use of the phrase, "Day One." And that's exactly what Einstein taught us in the Laws of Relativity: that there was a creation, not just of space and matter, but of time itself.
YOUR scientists proving creation. I love it.
Grow up.

You seem to have convinced yourself to 100% certainty with 0% evidence that there are multiple "rolled up" dimensions.

People convince themselves of many things when they have a need and a desire to believe in the supernatural. If there is one thing that is certain, it is that closer examination of anything will always lead to differentiable aspects. Gods have a tendency to breed when placed in philosophical intercourse with men.

I've seen this exercise repeatedly whereby apologists will play fast and loose with allegorical interpretations of the bible while entirely dodging the fundamental problem that none of these claims are demonstrable in any meaningful way. Is that why people are forced to use cutting and pasting from Wiki as their primary source for science education?

Sometimes you should take a serious look at your own views first.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Clearly you don't understand evolution. Try taking a class before asking a loaded question that screams "I have no idea what I'm talking about".

How about screaming me an answer, better yet, since you have had billions of years to evolve, create a digital code with 3 billion genetic letters. If soup can do it and you are so farther along now than soup was then, pony up.

You're assuming that because you don't know and/or understand the scientific explanation of evolution and how life started, that it must have been a magic feat performed by an invisible superbeing. There is, as of now, no solid proof for such a theory. IF there is such an invisible superbeing, it appears to me that evolution is part of its plan.
I mean, let's face it, the world wasn't made in six days either, our powerful telescopes confirm that planetary systems don't form that fast. Isn't that part of "scientists proving creation. I love it."? Or are you a delusional cherry picker who pretends to have already figured out the universe and everything in it?

You need to wake up,nobody on your side of the debate knows how life began but the bible has made it clear about the creator because you can't prove the creator exists does not prove he doesn't exist.

 

[Hollie]

You are not discussing science, only ID and creationism masquerading other than what they are: belief systems without scientific foundation. You sound as goofy as The Irish Ram.

Jakestarkey, if you wish to discuss science then do so otherwise you are beginning to sound like Hollie,nothing of substance.

I have opened the subject of cells and mutations to you and that is not science ? I have pointed out things that the bible claims and is supported by science. I posted a video to you once again you do not respond to the scientific questions raised.If I didn't know any better you want to discuss philosophy not science.

What I thought was really funny that you would deny that many assertions of the bible are scientific in nature and claim they are philosophy.

Springs in the oceans,man made from the dust of the ground,man made of things indiscernible to our eyes but can only be viewed through a microscope et cetera et cetra.

What you have done is to cut and paste volumes if material from creationist websites or posted videos from similar sources and then demanded that others "refute" that cutting and pasting. It's silly. You cut and paste material you don't understand because it appeals to your fascination with the supernatural.

What is comical is your need to take metaphors from biblical text and infer from that a deep understanding of science when there is none. It's a common tactic of apologists who would believe that their "holy" texts are the only books that anyone needs to read. You may feel that blissful ignorance is to be imposed on all but fortunately, most of the world
has discovered that knowledge can be found outside of ancient books if tales and fables.

 

[LOki]

It would not matter what you are shown from the bible,your minds are made up. I love posting this maybe some day it will sink in.

101 Scientific Facts & Foreknowledge

--101 EXAMPLES OF THE TEXAS SHAPSHOOTER FALLACY SNIPPED BECAUSE... ---​

... the conclusion derived from them is obvious bullshit.

Can you be a little more specific ? Take one of the issues on don't make a blanket statement without anything to back your claim.

The implication you're making here is obvious disinformation. Not at all surprising considering your robust record of intellectual dishonesty.

I have addressed each one of these dopey fallacies for you previously. Shall I provide a link(s)? Just ask.

When you guys ask questions I respond.

Yes. Your record of responding with disingenuous evasions is well documented. Shall I provide a link(s)? Just ask.

When you guys make assertions I question you that is how it works.

At least for my part, you get appropriate responses.

Do us both a favor and atleast read your material before you post so I don't have to read it and find out your argument is based on conjecture.

What conjecture? "Don't make a blanket statement without anything to back your claim."

 

[Hollie]

How about screaming me an answer, better yet, since you have had billions of years to evolve, create a digital code with 3 billion genetic letters. If soup can do it and you are so farther along now than soup was then, pony up.

You're assuming that because you don't know and/or understand the scientific explanation of evolution and how life started, that it must have been a magic feat performed by an invisible superbeing. There is, as of now, no solid proof for such a theory. IF there is such an invisible superbeing, it appears to me that evolution is part of its plan.
I mean, let's face it, the world wasn't made in six days either, our powerful telescopes confirm that planetary systems don't form that fast. Isn't that part of "scientists proving creation. I love it."? Or are you a delusional cherry picker who pretends to have already figured out the universe and everything in it?

You need to wake up,nobody on your side of the debate knows how life began but the bible has made it clear about the creator because you can't prove the creator exists does not prove he doesn't exist.

As effective an argument as any 12 year old could make.

That is why we can all agree that Amun Ra is just as likely to "exist" as your gods... because you can't prove he doesn't exist.

Thanks. I feel considerably worse for having read your nonsensical comments.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I addressed one of the claims in the volumes of material you cut and pasted and you ran for the exits when the "scientific miracle" was dismantled.

What's laughabe is that you address nothing except by way of spamming when you cut and paste the same nonsense multiple times.

You are gonna have to point that out to me.

It was in connection with your silly claim to the biblical miracle of ocean springs.

You should not take my response as a reason to again cut and paste half the contents of Harun Yahya's website.

Hernando: Inside the nation's deepest spring

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymShNsJ0Zqc]Creation Science - Oceans Contain Springs - YouTube[/ame]

Oceans contain springs?

THE DISCOVERY

The discovery of ocean floor springs represents a great milestone in the scientific investigation of the earth. Before 1930 little was known about the ocean floor. Volcanoes were observed to break the sea surface and this provided evidence of undersea volcanism. Because modern volcanoes on land emit steam, scientists suggested that water might be coming out of volcanoes on the ocean floor.

The deep sea dives of William Beebe's bathysphere in the 1930's provided a close look at the ocean floor, but no springs were observed. In the 1940's mapping of undersea topography was under way using the echo sounder. Thousands of undersea volcanoes called "seamounts" and "guyots" were recognized and speculation about undersea springs increased. In the 1960's metal-rich, hot brines were discovered using sonar in the bottom of the Red Sea. This brine was an indirect evidence of water coming out of the ocean floor. Aided by reports from Mexican abalone divers, scientists using scuba equipment located shallow-water hot springs along the coast of Baja California in the late 1960s.








Vent in the seafloor where hot water
issues from the earth into the ocean.


Deep diving research submarines have been constructed to withstand the three-tons-per-square-inch pressure at the ocean floor. These submarines have carried scientists into the deep. The first direct observations of deepsea springs, or their mineralized vents, appear to have been made on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge by Project FAMOUS in 1973. Spectacular hot springs were then discovered on the Galapagos Rift in the Pacific Ocean by the 23-foot long submersible Alvin in 1977. Alvin also explored, photographed and sampled hot springs on the East Pacific Rise just south of the Gulf of California in 1979. The research continues.

Several nontechnical magazine reports present photographs and descriptions of these recently discovered seafloor springs. The Galapagos Rift springs are described in the November 1979 issue of National Geographic. The article is titled "Incredible World of the Deep-sea Rifts" and bears the caption: "Scientists explore rifts in the seafloor where hot springs spew minerals and startling life exists in a strange world without sun.

The East Pacific Rise springs are shown in Science News, January 12, 1980. This article is titled, "Smokers, Red Worms, and Deep Sea Plumbing" and is followed by the caption; "Sea floor oases of mineral-rich springs and amazing creatures fulfill oceanographers' dreams." The discovery of these deep ocean springs is said to be the "most significant oceanographic find since the discovery of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge."

The hot springs have been called "black smokers." The "smoke" is the dark, mineral-laden, hot (up to 400'C) water spewing from "chimneys" up to 15-feet tall atop mounds of minerals up to 60-feet high. The minerals coating the vents are largely sulfides of copper, iron and zinc precipitated instantly as the hot geysers contact the cold seawater. The vents provide the habitat for the first community of animals to be discovered which does not obtain energy by way of photosynthesis. Animals collected include red-tipped tube worms, giant clams, mussels, sea worms, crabs, and limpets. The Science News article describes the East Pacific Rise springs: … the researchers found about two dozen hot springs stretched along 6 km of the half-kilometer wide spreading center. But next to these angry-looking, superheated geysers—called "smokers"—the Galapagos Rift vents looked like tepid sprinklers. Not only was the gushing water about 300'C hotter (the first attempt to measure the water temperature melted Alvin's heat probe), but around the chimneys lay mounds of minerals including copper, iron, zinc and sulfur with lesser amounts of cobalt, lead, silver and cadmium. Like the Galapagos, however, the same animals, with the exception of the mussels, were clustered in fields near the vents.

Although scientists have examined only a small portion of ocean floor, seafloor springs appear to be common along the 40,000-mile Mid-Oceanic Ridge system. Dr. John M. Edmond of M.I.T. suggests that water circulation through oceanic springs is a major geologic process; he estimates that 40 cubic miles of water flow out of earth's oceanic springs each year. If this is so, then mineralization must be an important process on the sea floor, and study of ocean springs may promote understanding and location of ore deposits. Ocean springs are also a vast, untapped source of geothermal energy, which, unfortunately, is located far from the major population and energy demand areas.

The discovery of ocean springs ranks as one of the foremost scientific accomplishments of the last ten years. Let us remember, however, that their existence was known thousands of years ago. Surely, God spoke through men by means of His Holy Spirit.

Springs of the Ocean

Sources quoted.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You are not discussing science, only ID and creationism masquerading other than what they are: belief systems without scientific foundation. You sound as goofy as The Irish Ram.

I have opened the subject of cells and mutations to you and that is not science ? I have pointed out things that the bible claims and is supported by science. I posted a video to you once again you do not respond to the scientific questions raised.If I didn't know any better you want to discuss philosophy not science.

What I thought was really funny that you would deny that many assertions of the bible are scientific in nature and claim they are philosophy.

Springs in the oceans,man made from the dust of the ground,man made of things indiscernible to our eyes but can only be viewed through a microscope et cetera et cetra.

What you have done is to cut and paste volumes if material from creationist websites or posted videos from similar sources and then demanded that others "refute" that cutting and pasting. It's silly. You cut and paste material you don't understand because it appeals to your fascination with the supernatural.

What is comical is your need to take metaphors from biblical text and infer from that a deep understanding of science when there is none. It's a common tactic of apologists who would believe that their "holy" texts are the only books that anyone needs to read. You may feel that blissful ignorance is to be imposed on all but fortunately, most of the world
has discovered that knowledge can be found outside of ancient books if tales and fables.

I have given many explanations on mutations and cells in my own words in several different threads here that get ignored where your side resorts to rhetorical responses nothing of substance.

 

[Hollie]

I have opened the subject of cells and mutations to you and that is not science ? I have pointed out things that the bible claims and is supported by science. I posted a video to you once again you do not respond to the scientific questions raised.If I didn't know any better you want to discuss philosophy not science.

What I thought was really funny that you would deny that many assertions of the bible are scientific in nature and claim they are philosophy.

Springs in the oceans,man made from the dust of the ground,man made of things indiscernible to our eyes but can only be viewed through a microscope et cetera et cetra.

What you have done is to cut and paste volumes if material from creationist websites or posted videos from similar sources and then demanded that others "refute" that cutting and pasting. It's silly. You cut and paste material you don't understand because it appeals to your fascination with the supernatural.

What is comical is your need to take metaphors from biblical text and infer from that a deep understanding of science when there is none. It's a common tactic of apologists who would believe that their "holy" texts are the only books that anyone needs to read. You may feel that blissful ignorance is to be imposed on all but fortunately, most of the world
has discovered that knowledge can be found outside of ancient books if tales and fables.

I have given many explanations on mutations and cells in my own words in several different threads here that get ignored where your side resorts to rhetorical responses nothing of substance.

I think its false to claim that you have offered explanations for anything regarding cell biology that wasn't cut and pasted from one of the creationist ministries you cut and paste from.

As we see so often with your cutting and pasting, the crestionist ministries struggle to find some inconsistency with the established biological sciences and herald that as an indictment of the entirety of the science community. It's a common tactic of the creationist crowd. They are unable to adhere to principles of the scientific method and peer review as it relates to substantiating their outrageous claims so they are left with flaccid attempts to discredit science.