We must trust this stuff?
First it was Freud reversing himself on hysteria in order to protect a child-molesting colleague. Then in the Margaret Mead, cooking the books on her research in Samoa, to make the data fit her pre-conceived ideas. Then it was evolutionists rewriting history to pretend that Christians believed in a "flat earth," and other absurdities. What scientific giant would fall next?
Enter Alfred Kinsey, whose 1948 book Sexual Behavior in the Humand Male and his 1953 sequel Sexual Behavior in the Human Female gave scientific justification for the sexual revolution of the sixties and seventies. Rachel Waldavsky (Reader's Digest, April 1997) reports that Kinsey collected child pornography, photos and film of children engaged in sexual acts from adults who had had sex with them. "It is not so difficult," Kinsey wrote in his second report, "to explain why a human animal does a particular thing sexually. It is more difficult to explain why each and every individual is not involved in every type of sexual activity."
Kinsey's conclusions were based on samples "grossly unrepresentative" of the general population. Those who volunteer for such projects are two to four times more active sexually than non volunteers, and Kinsey's samples also included prison inmates, 1400 convicted sex offenders. This is science? Is it science to go looking for what you want to find?
In spite of the fraud and corruption in the scientific community--a national scandal reported by Time magazine (August 26, 1991), huge numbers of Americans would rather trust their souls to the findings of science, swallowing the "research" blindly, rather than the old, old story of Jesus Christ, which does not change with the tides of human philosophy or adapt itself in order to obtain government grants.