Drug companies do not have to report on all of the evidence or experimentation regarding new drugs they
want to market. This means that they can merely report on the one positive test out of the 50 negative
trials. However, this kind of biased, unbalanced reporting can be used to “prove”
the value of any drug!
Is this same bias endemic to other areas of the scientific
enterprise? Evidently! Foundations and governmental bodies pour millions, even
billions, into research universities, not to find the truth, but to prove
evolution. Meanwhile, I am not aware of any such money funding studies to prove
ID or creationism.
What will be the inevitable result of such an imbalance in
experimentation? Researchers will inevitably “find” what they are looking for!
However, it is not even as simple as this profound
imbalance. Intimidation has also become
the standard in suppressing unwanted findings. Bruce Malone gives one example
of what happened when someone contradicted the establishment orthodoxy
pertaining to the dating of the dinosaurs:
·
Mark Armitage, the discoverer of the osteocytes
in the triceratops horn, and instructor at a microscopy lab at California State
University… showed his students the material. They returned to their Earth
science departments excited to share the inconsistency of these finds (which
contradicted the evolutionary teaching they were being taught) with their
geology, anthropology, and paleontology professors. The result – Armitage was
fired from his job within days of his paper being published in July 2013. This
was in spite of years of stellar performance and excellent reviews setting up
and running the university’s microscopy lab. (Brilliant, 23)
Many such incidents suggest that such repression of
divergent voices is standard operating procedure – enough to make even the most
gullible suspect of what is currently marketed.
No comments:
Post a Comment