Re: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

From: janice matchett <>
Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 - 10:32:09 EDT

Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:40:02 -0700
From: Pim van Meurs <>

janice matchett wrote:

>At 04:33 PM 9/4/2005, Pim van Meurs wrote:
>>....*dila813 on
>>explained it quite well*
>>What's your conclusion Janice?
>## My conclusion? Follow the money. Money, power, and approval from
>their peers is what motivates those who engage in junk science and the
>religion of scientism. They outnumber serious scientists 99 to 1. Many
>of them teach their religion of scientism in science classes in the public

Pim: Nice unsupported foundations.

Janice: Since I don't see you submitting a scientific paper showing
supported foundations for all the just-so statements you make, I didn't
think you'd expect one from me.

>If children come out of the tax-payer funded schools believing that man
>will "destroy the planet" unless the USA signs the Kyoto "treaty", they
>have not learned "science" in science class. That is going to stop.

Pim: Global warming is quite well established.

Janice: Don't change the subject - especially with "just-so" statements.

Of course "global warming" is quite well established --- so is "global
cooling". It's the natural order of things.

([ As an aside - have you put your money where your mouth is, yet? Climate
change sceptics bet $10,000 on cooler
world,3604,1552092,00.html ])

But some will always want to try and cut God down to manageable size - or
out of the picture - so they can elevate themselves to God-status -- either
by professing atheism, deism, evolutionism, scientism, or any of the other
thousands of "isms" that fall under the man-centered religion.

Many practitioners of the man-centered religion attempt to indoctrinate
little children into their "beliefs" using tax-payer funds. One of the
beliefs they teach is that man is so powerful that he is able to "save the
earth" or "destroy the earth" , ie:

"Even if there is a God, he is irrelevant because man is able to thwart
what he has done, is doing, or will do" ~ is the unspoken message that the
children pick up loud and clear.

This guy sums the mind-set up very well:

  "..Though it always comes as a surprise to intellectuals, there are some
forms of stupidity that one must be highly intelligent and educated to
commit. .." ~ Dr. Jay

Pim: What science have you learned?

Janice: The subject is now changed to "me "and my "credentials"? Let's
just put it this way; this sort of scientific research isn't where I
obtained my BS

Pim: And do you consider ID or YEC to be part of this junk science as
well, motivated by what?

Janice: You may find what I believe on the subject, here:

Pim: Your view of science is quite sad. It explains a lot though.

Janice: Is your misrepsentation of my "view of science" deliberate or did
you make that assertion because you don't like the fact that I object to
the religion of scientism being taught to children in tax-payer-funded
science classes?

I will reiterate my opinion: Junk scientists outnumber serious scientists
99 to 1 -- and much of it is because they wouldn't get any funding for
research unless they conform to the conventional wisdom -- which is the
religion of scientism as promoted by revered icons of incoherency and
illogic such as:


  Reminder: Most Published Research Findings Are False because of the
conscious or unconscious biased motivations behind the

Received on Tue Sep 6 10:34:13 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 06 2005 - 10:34:13 EDT