Sorry-sorry-sorry, yeah I'm cranky today. Didn't mean to take it out on you all. "BAD MINGEZ!!" (Slaps himself on hand) But if I don't say what I'm thinking aren't I being "PC"? And I know you all hate that!
Yes TC, it was out of character. And while I'd be lying if I said I wasn't thinking that in my head... for actually posting it I apologize. The criticism and poke being posted, was out of line. And yes, I was being snobby and condecsending-- things that I despise more than anything on this planet....
Sorry 90Xjay.
First off, let me say that all I took exception to is the assumption that everything in academia is a lie if you don't agree with it. It's akin to me saying: "Everything in the Bible is a lie" Or "the institution of church is a lie"...etc.
Most of the things you listed as examples are outdated and refuted by scientists and anthropologists. If your local public school system is still citing that stuff, then maybe homeschooling is a good idea.
Just the very fact that you cited "Piltdown man" as an example shows that you are fishing through Creationist propaganda. It's the go-to example for that side of the arguement. That was a hoax from the very beginning, and proved incorrect by evolutionists themselves (not Creationists).
But I understand that those of faith would have an objection to evolution through
natural selection being taught in school due to it's inherent nature to contradict the writings and teachings of christianity. So I understand, and support your reasons there, it's a free country.
I do however want to point out, that the examples listed in his post is oversimplification of a vast science (and a hard science) that admits to making mistakes in its history. Mistakes are opportunity for discovery. Science, as a process is 1-Theory, 2-experimentation (where the idea is to prove the theory wrong), 3-evaluating data and drawing a conclusion, which usually ends up bringing one to more questions than answers. And the "Examples" listed are examples of process, but not proof of ineptness. Simply put, science considers
"failure" a
"victory", for this is how truths are discovered.
Next, I want to state for the record that it's the "Theory of Evolution through
Natural Selection" that is debated between creationists and evolutionists not
evolution itself. Evolution as a process is usually considered fact by biologists and rarely debated by learned Creationists. Rather, it's how these changes occur and where splits and orgins i.e. apes, primordial soup, single celled organisms began that is argued.
I was an Anthro (and Comm) Major, and have entirely too much schooling on this particular subject and have learned to avoid this debate like GW avoids using "big" words. (slaps self on hand again..."BAD MINGEZ"):lol:
BTW, if your are honest, it takes you more faith to believe that you came from apes, which came from plants, which came from primordial soup, which came from rain on the earths rocky crust, which the earth came from a big bang, then it takes me to believe where I came from.
If I respond to that...then I won't be keeping to my promise to not open this Pandora's box. But suffice it to say that I strongly disagree... "honestly."
Mingez,
you poor child, I know you probably worshiped your professors in college and clung to their every word.
Yeah I did listen to many of my professors, but I usually disagreed with most of them too. :wink: How 'bout you and your pastor/priest? :lol: (I mean that in total jest)...but don't ever call me a child pal...(I'm kidding again)
Lastly, and most importantly, I
DON'T want to have a Religion vs Science, Academia vs. Church, and Creation vs. Evolution debate. I don't want to offend anyone (anymore) and retorting to
90Xjay's last post would only accomplish just that. I'll debate anything else, but not this subject, because doing so only leads to hurt feelings due to the emotional attachment to the belief of any religion.
I conclude with this: "Absence of evidence isn't necessarily proof of evidence of absence." That is a good point when speaking about both the missing link and God both. Just because you can't prove the existence of either, doesn't mean they don't exist. :wink: