Letter: Dishonesty in science
This is in response to the June 12 letter to the editor titled "Our mistrust of scientists." The author says: "It is distressing that many climate-change denial columns feature words such as 'hoax,' 'fraud,' even 'criminal.' A calm discussion of facts is impossible where there is such mistrust."
And so I calmly ask him: How much man-made carbon dioxide do we have to eliminate in order to correct the climate change problem?
I believe that a primary source for mistrust of some scientists comes from the macro-evolution fiasco. The field of biochemistry, especially the concept of genetic entropy, shows us that macro-evolution cannot happen and never has. Indeed, we are in a state of devolution. No new genetic information is being created, we are headed for extinction because we will eventually be so genetically defective as to be unable to reproduce.
In short, the information in the human genome was designed and is falling apart at apparently some non-linear rate. We're part of "planned obsolescence." When I have spoken to high school biology teachers on this subject, I usually got the feeling that they were somewhat embarrassed over having to teach macro-evolution; I suppose they don't have a choice if it is in the state standards. I don't think there is a teacher anywhere who can defend macro-evolution, but we still teach it. Why? Obviously some of our scientists are being dishonest, thereby sowing the seeds of mistrust, even if it's in the field of climatology.