And I Trust Evolutionists Because...?

It seems that from the beginning of popular evolutionary theory, there has been a great desire to be the "next big thing". Darwin hurried to get his book published after he learned that Alfred Russell Wallace had a very similar idea. "Science" has subjected the public to Nebraska Man (built from the tooth of an extinct pig), Piltdown Man (a fake that fooled the scientific establishment for decades) and many other spurious, suspicious, fraudulent "finds" in a relentless quest for self-promotion to be the next "discoverer" of nonexistent evolutionary proof.

Since evolution is not observational science, but rather, a theory about past events using scientific methods ("historical science"); it is not testable, repeatable, observable, falsifiable, verifiable and so on. But evolution is well funded, and people want that government grant money. (What happened to the alleged separation of church and state? Evolution is based on faith more than on science.) People also want to be heroes, and to spread what they consider the "truth" of evolution — sometimes at all costs.

Hasty conclusions based on insufficient evidence, as well as dishonesty. Do "science" and "truth" need so much help?
"To err is human," according to the 18th-century English poet Alexander Pope.
Human error is not uncommon, even in the area of scientific investigations. But the number of scientific papers that are published and later retracted has increased exponentially within just the past decade.
A retraction, according to a recent news feature in the journal Nature, is "science's ultimate post-publication punishment…the official declaration that a paper is so flawed that it must be withdrawn from the literature."

Popular posts from this blog

Evolution and the New Atheo-Fascism

Discerning Fake Science

Misotheists Dehumanizing Christians and Creationists