[Vision2020] NSA's accrediting agency is not recognized in Texas

[Joe Campbell]

Crabtree's comments and links are misleading. He notes 10 links. Suppose 
there were 100 instances in which scientists fudged data. Should we conclude 
that ALL scientists fudge data or that SOME do?

I could come up with countless instances in which Pastors have made things 
up in order to convince their followers -- for nothing more than economic 
gain. Does that mean that ALL religion is hogwash? That all Pastors are out for 
nothing other than selfish financial gain? That Christianity is built upon a 
thrown of lies? Of course not.

On the whole, science offers the best model of objective knowledge that we 
have. It is not perfect and scientists are not perfect. But to think that ALL 
scientists who endorse evolution theory are biased -- or, more to the point, to 
think that Crabtree's 10 links support this claim -- is absurd.

If Crabtree was trying to establish the claim that scientists are biased on the 
basis of his 10 links, then he is guilty of the fallacy of small sample. I would 
say the same for anyone who tried to make a similar claim about religion 
based on 10 links -- which is easy enough to do. The history of science is 
extensive and glorious. The case for evolution theory is great, also, which is 
why the number of biologists working in the area who reject it can be counted 
on one hand. It would take a billion examples to prove Crabtree's point, and I 
don't see that coming any time soon.

I'd contribute to this forum a bit more if I found ONE conservative who was 
willing to call Crabtree on the crap that he continually throws out.

--
Joe Campbell