minarchist
Regular Member
Many individuals can be placed in prison using various special forms of evidence in lieu of straightforward video footage and eyewitness testimony (e.g., solely with non-visual forms of evidence). There is a plethora of forensic science at society's disposal, relating to DNA, fingerprints, hair, bodily fluids, etc, that can be used to detect who was responsible for a crime. It is inconsistent in the extreme to laud the use of these forensic techniques to convict people when "no was present to observe and no video camera was present to record" the crime in question, while objecting to the scientific consensus on origins because "no was present to observe and no video camera was present to record" the events that the scientific evidence (much of it, ironically, similar to the evidence used to convict people, such as DNA analysis) overwhelmingly supports, which is a favorite tactic of creationists. This is a case of people welcoming the products of science that they like (shiny new gadgets and the ability to detect who perpetrates crimes) while ridiculing science for killing their sacred cows.
So zealots, put your money where your mouth is and demand the release of all felons whose convictions did not entail eyewitness testimony or video evidence.
So zealots, put your money where your mouth is and demand the release of all felons whose convictions did not entail eyewitness testimony or video evidence.
Last edited: