Online sites peddling religious science are a common sight at temples, mosques, mosques and other places where Muslims gather.
But some of the sites contain misleading information, as they often omit important points or outright misrepresent religious science as the scientific method.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s latest report found that many websites are misleading about scientific topics.
The commission found that some sites contain the wrong keywords for scientific journals and websites that have misleading information.
“A vast number of religious science sites claim to be ‘scientific’ and ‘objective’, but they often do not provide any evidence of scientific validity,” said Peter Hausman, the commission’s executive director.
“Many websites omit important elements of scientific methodology, such as peer review, and they often misrepresent the evidence on the basis of their own personal interpretation of it.”
A number of online sites also fail to report that their scientific content is based on their own interpretations of the science.
In fact, some of them even go so far as to say that they are ‘scientific’, even though they are in reality simply quoting scientific theories and data from the scientific literature.
“It is difficult to find information about scientific facts and concepts in many religious science journals, because many are owned by organisations that promote religion, such the World Federation of Scientists, the Science Foundation of India, the National Center for Scientific Research and the Indian Council of Scientific Research,” said Hausmann.
“If religious scientists are not using the scientific methods and principles that have been developed by the scientific community, how can they claim to have a scientific voice?”
A number are also misleading in how they present their data.
Many of the religious science articles on these sites include ‘claims’ such as ‘I have read this article’, ‘I was told that this is what the science is about’, ‘this article was published in the journal’, ‘the source of this article is from the Journal of Scientific and Technical Information’ and so on.
“These are claims that the site is a credible source,” said Mr Hausma.
“Some sites even state that their source is peer reviewed and that it is based in peer-reviewed journals,” he added.
“However, most of these claims are simply false.”
The commission said that many religious scientists were not being truthful about their scientific work and the lack of peer-review or data-sharing on their scientific projects.
“In many cases, the articles are published in religious journals, but they do not contain the data needed to evaluate the claims,” said the commission.
data availability, lack of quality control, and lack of disclosure of peer reviewed research, make it difficult for researchers to publish their findings in scientific journals.” “
There is a lot of work to be done on the data sharing issue, as the lack.
data availability, lack of quality control, and lack of disclosure of peer reviewed research, make it difficult for researchers to publish their findings in scientific journals.”
Dr Tanya Zuber, a senior lecturer at the University of Melbourne, said it was important to take note of the accuracy of scientific claims.
“When it comes to scientific claims, it is important to remember that scientists do not always get it right,” she said.
“The quality of the data used is also an important part of how a scientific study is published.”
However, some religious scientists did seem to be doing a good job in providing accurate information, especially when it came to their science.
“I would like to see more information on the accuracy and reliability of scientific publications, as well as the way in which the science has been presented in publications,” said Dr Zuber.
“As a scientist, I do not see any reason why I should not be able to do the same.”
But the commission noted that there was a danger in using fake scientific websites as a way to spread misleading information about religious science.
They said it could cause harm to faith-based organisations and societies that rely on such sites to promote their science and to gain access to the scientific data.
“While these websites are sometimes legitimate, they can be misleading, deceptive or misleading to members of religious communities, and in particular to members who are already struggling with their own religious beliefs,” said Ms Zuber in a statement.
“They can also encourage people to misuse the scientific process or to distort the scientific consensus on religion and science.”
She also noted that religious science had been misrepresented in some ways.
“Sometimes the terms of reference are misleading, and often the research is poorly peer-conducted or not based on any science,” said Zuber “Religious science is very well documented in the scientific record.
It is not that the term ‘religion’ has been substituted for ‘science’ or ‘facts’,” she added.
‘No scientific evidence’ on religion’s origins There are a number of misconceptions that religious scientists often use to claim that the scientific evidence