Lindisfarne #fundie

Lindisfarne #fundie bbs.payableondeath.com

I think I should point out that my post wasn't about the solidarity of the [Evolution] theory, it was about the way many people follow the theory without question. Of course scientists wouldn't care if the theory would be proved untrue, that wasn't the point, the point was that many people who believe in it, would deny it's untruth, just like they did 1000's of years ago.

3 comments

Noone is expected to "follow evolution". However, it is very useful to understand it, for your comprehension of biology and life. Then if you mean social Darwinism, that's something else and not science. Science would care, if evolution was demonstrated to be untrue, because it's not dogmatic, its aim is just knowledge of the natural world.

“the point, the point was that many people who believe in it, would deny it's untruth, just like they did 1000's of years ago.”
I think Piltdown Man would be instructive, here.
That hoax was crafted to match the theories of the time. But as time went on, more evidence was collected, and he became less and less accepted by scientists.
Finally they wondered if it was fake and examined it with an eye towards forgery. (“They” being scientists, not creationists, it must be noted)
Many people at the time rejected the idea that it had been fake. But the evidence was compelling and now everyone accepts that it’s a hoax.

For evolution to be rejected as untruth, there needs to be a newer and better scientific theory offered that explains all the evidence for Evolution and at least one thing evolution cannot explain. Say, if DNA actually has an upper limit to microevolution, so macro is impossible. Some people will resist, but IFF the evidence is there, it will compel eventual acceptance. Just like evolutionary theory did in the first place. Or continental drift. Or any science.

Lindisfarne #fundie bbs.payableondeath.com

3 comments

Confused?