"There were gross discrepancies in the Haeckel's data."
Actually, no there weren't. In fact, Haeckel did nothing different from his contemporaries. And in fact Haeckel's followers in the scientific community not only verified his observations, they built on them. As I've said before, it is a bit hard to perpetrate a fraud when anyone with a microscope can refute your claims.
"Anyone arguing that it was not purposeful depends upon an audience ignorant of laboratory research."
Nope, not true, since even his harshest modern scientist critics still accept his basic conclusions regarding recapitulation and most accept his basic conclusions regarding the biogenetic law. Besides, anyone in this group -- even Joseph -- can get a microscope and confirm that Haeckel's basic observations were right on.
"Even laboratory technicians are taught to be scrupulously exact."
As a working scientist I can tell you all that this is only a half truth. No human being can be "scrupulously exact" (especially Joseph!), so no scientist is expected to be incapable of error. However, scientists are taught to be scrupulously honest, so that if they make a mistake they must admit to it and correct it. Haeckel had admitted his mistake. Besides, working scientists know there are times when you must be precise, but that there are also times when you don't need to be precise. Experience teaches which times are which.
"Haeckel's gross discrepancies were obvious fraud, not carelessness."
So Joseph knows better than Haeckel's modern scientific critics. How modest of him. Even so, instead of providing evidence that his claim is true, Joseph offers only rhetoric and bad logic. How scientific of him.
"The fraud was deliberate and thoughtful, like the Piltdown man, to further the evolutionist agenda."
In the case of Piltdown Man we have direct physical evidence of fraud; there is none in the case of Haeckel. Joseph cannot prove that Haeckel set out to deliberately deceive his colleagues in the name of evolution. (In fact there is proof that Haeckel considered evolution secondary to his true goal: explaining the mechanism of ontogeny.) Which is probably why he so far has not accepted my challenge. Well, he still has until midnight tonight. Maybe he will fool us all.
"The next argument is that a gang of partisans wrote in complaining that they use Haeckel's falsified data and because they are so many it can't be false. That is the democracy principle. If there are enough votes, then the data are not false and any falsehood can be voted true."
I have no idea where this came from, except perhaps his own fevered imagination. But as usual he has it completely backwards. Scientific facts are not considered true because a majority of scientists believe they are true; rather a majority of scientists believe scientific facts are true because they are in fact true.
"And the next argument is that Haeckel was truly a great man and his critics were jealous. Therefore, we must find Haeckel innocent and the critics guilty."
A jealous man is far more likely to make groundless, personal attacks than a man who doesn't care one wit. After all, isn't that your excuse for all these personal attacks you make?
"Anyone who speaks against the party line on this list is always scrubbed by big brothers until his brain thinks only party line. And they will frankly tell you that not thinking party line is dangerous. They know. All their brains have been thoroughly scrubbed."
There you have it, folks. Joseph equates scientific truth with brainwashing. Or perhaps more correctly, he considers anyone who disputes him to be brainwashed. Poor deluded fellow.
Welcome to the magical fantasy world of Joseph.
Kevin L. O'Brien