Accountability

     An essential characteristic of genuine science is accountability. As with elimination of bias, accountability is essential because it minimizes the adverse effect of human frailties on interpretation of data. A lack of accountability results in an absence of consequences for incorrect conclusions. Consequences for invalid conclusions assure objectivity in one's methods of study. Therefore, any scientific discipline that lacks accountability cannot be trusted to produce accurate results.

     A physician, for example, has daily accountability. If a child with bacterial meningitis presents with fever and headache, the physician evaluates the patient and draws conclusions based on scientific training and experience. If his conclusions are incorrect and he sends the child home with the diagnosis of a viral illness, dire consequences can occur, including death or permanent disability of his patient, as well as personal medical liability for his incorrect diagnosis. One of the reasons that medicine is respected as a science is because those who practice it must face consequences for incorrect decisions. Because of this, physicians are required to be objective. Their ultimate desire is to arrive at the truth as opposed to a particular predetermined conclusion.

     Consider in contrast to this a paleontologist who, following years of searching, claims to have discovered a new transitional species of marine fossil that is purported to be 500 million years old. Interpretation of such a find is done solely by those eager to validate evolution. Falsification of such a claim would have no bearing on the real world in terms of a benefit or harm to man or the environment. Thus, the paleontologist is free to make proclamations without proof. No risks are taken because no consequences for incorrect conclusions are in place. If it were suddenly proven that all Cambrian fossils were actually 5,000 years old, such information would be of academic interest only. Disproof of any tenet of evolution only results in erosion of the theory of evolution. Beyond that, no adverse consequences to humanity result from incorrect conclusions.

In this comparison, the physician practices with accountability, whereas the paleontologist does not. The physician makes every effort to arrive at the truth. The paleontologist hopes that his find is a missing link.

     If the physician is wrong, consequences for erroneous conclusions are in place. If the paleontologist is wrong, no consequences follow. He therefore has no incentive to maintain strict intellectual honesty because none of his peers require it.

Scientific disciplines that have a great deal of accountability are generally more respected than those that don’t. Fields of mathematics, genetics, chemistry, microbiology and other endeavors that have direct impact on the world must justify all tenets by proof. The truth or error of any claim is borne out by reality in the actual world. Fields with less accountability such as cosmology and paleontology are less respected. This is because the truth or falsity of a claim has less relevance in the world. Furthermore, conclusions are extremely difficult to falsify. As a result, theories are advanced without proofs. The lack of accountability in evolutionary research is an inherent characteristic of that field of study, because it attempts to explain historical events that are difficult to falsify and have no real relevance to daily life.

 


     Since teaching of evolution has been conducted unchecked for 160 years, the lack of scientific accountability has resulted in embarrassing overstatements.  In 1894 Eugene Dubois went to Indonesia to search for the "missing link" in human evolution. He was excited to find a ape-like skullcap (second from left), and a tooth.  The following year, he found a femur 42 feet away from the skull cap.  He assumed that the femur and the skullcap pertained to the same being.  Given the fact that the femur is identical to a modern human femur, and that the skullcap appeared like an ape, this has been publicized in biology textbooks for over a century as Homo Erectus, an ape-like sub-human ancestor that walked upright.

     Because no scientific accountability is in place, evolutionists freely unleash their imaginations in the attempt to validate a worldview.  Notice the liberal artistic license.  A skull is constructed based on a skullcap and a tooth.  From this, full-body reconstructions have been proliferated for decades.  An average adult with minimal understanding of science can easily recognize that this is not valid science.