atheism, page-28

Your links are about fraudulent people in the scientific community and their misleading work. Unfortunately, this happens in both the scientific and religious communities and is the result of unethical people – although so far, fraudulent behavior in the scientific community has not contributed to the spread of aids).

I could write an article on a scientific topic that is complete rubbish. It might sound like science but it would actually be nonsense. The fact that an article uses scientific words doesn’t make is science; it is just a person and their drivel.

I think posting all of those articles (that you didn’t completely read) has confused you. Let me refresh your memory.

You said ‘you put too much "faith" in science lol’
I said ‘The science I put my 'faith' in has supporting evidence’ – meaning it has so far passed every test and review.

You said ‘oh I suppose you never heard of scientific fraud lol’.

I asked for example of a case where universally accepted science (the science that I put my ‘faith’ in) was later shown to be fraudulent.

So far you have not done that. The cases you presented all became unstuck when finer details were investigated.

On a side note. Have you heard of the stawman fallacy?

'to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the straw man'), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position. This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues.' - Wiki

Those without critical thinking skills stand out like a hooker in church.