Okay, We Give Up [Scientific American "Caves" on Evolution]

Scientific American ^ | 01 April 2005 (ponder that) | Editorial staff

[followerofchrist]

I recall an archaelogical magazine with the same title, but don't know if it is this one. The one I read was put out by amateurs, not scientists. If this is the same mag, it would be dishonest to say scientists are "admitting" their bias.

[PreciousLiberty]

"Perhaps they should talk to one of the 160 scientists who are pro-Creation."

Scientists who are "pro-Creation" are not scientists in that regard. Evolution is supported by a wealth of scientific observation. Creation (as taught in the Bible) is supported by none.

I suppose you also maintain the Earth is 5000 years old. ;-)

[dighton]

Ping to #10, a good summing-up of this item in particular, and our “smarmy, condescending and arrogant” press in general.

[followerofchrist]

Checked the site, it's not the same one written by amateurs.

[TrueKnightGalahad]

I agree; in the mid-90s I think they took a hard left turn, and have never recovered. Especially after la affaire Lomborg, I can't read anything they print without dissecting it for hidden, and not-so-hidden, political tacks. SA, like the MSM, has shown its true colors, and they range from light pink to deeply red.

[inquest]

I don't know of any other field where you often hear it said, a priori, that scientists who believe such-and-such a thing aren't "really" scientists, no matter what their credentials actually are. Odd psychology, there.

[Lazamataz]

I think evolutionists, creationists, and intelligent-design people are complete fools.

Sam, a large turtle, created everything out of old legos and silly putty.

I am a Turtlist.

[Heartlander]

Un-Scientific Un-American

[c-five]

I found this editorial smarmy, condescending and arrogant.

dead on!

[inquest]

I've been looking at your link for a couple of minutes now. Is all that thing going to do is sit there cracking eggs onto the page? If so, that's not much of a stinging commentary. And this is from someone who doesn't like SA's attitude towards science either.

[RhoTheta]

I used to subscribe to SA in the 60's. It had deep, detailed, thought-provoking articles. Today's product has shrunk in size and depth to more resemble coffee table science.

Another deep dissappointment is National Geographic. We have been subscribers (perpetual Christmas gift) from 1967. They ought to call the present mag National Geopolitical. What does an article on the physiology of brain chemistry have to do with Geography? NG is another mag that has obviously been taken over by the PC Left.

[RadioAstronomer]

The one that got me good was their rope and pully computer from ancient times! I bought it hook line and sinker. LMAO!

[mikeus_maximus]

"Evolution is supported by a wealth of scientific observation.'

Kewl! They've seen evolution? I wasn't aware of that. Would you please post the pics?

Or maybe you could just post the pics of the Cambrian transitional forms.

Thanks in advance.

[PatrickHenry]

it's good to see them show, all in one nice neat little paragraph, what their true political bent is.

Yeah, they're lefties. Much of academia is. That's why we treasure our science threads and our many conservative scientists on this website.

[RadioAstronomer]

Another deep dissappointment is National Geographic.

I gave up on them years ago. I read "The American Scientist" and "Physics Today". (Member of APS)

[PatrickHenry]

Scientific American once ran this article, which wasn't on April First: 15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense.

[inkling]

This article reminded of this classic poem...

Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau:
Mock on, mock on: ‘tis all in vain!
You throw the sand against the wind,
And the wind blows it back again.

And every sand becomes a Gem,
Reflected in the beam divine;
Blown back they blind the mocking Eye,
But still in Israel’s paths they shine.

The Atoms of Democritus
And the Newton’s Particles of Light
Are sands upon the Red Sea shore,
Where Israel’s tents do shine so bright.

-=- William Blake, 1757-1827

[Spiff]

Haha! Let's spoof on the Christians and their crazy beliefs... teehee...

Funny how the so-called "scientists" worship their theories with a faith unmatched by the most fanatical of any other religion. More funny when an exalted theory crumbles under new evidence and they are left with nothing.

Thou shalt have no others gods before me. - God

The wise man built his house upon a rock. - Jesus

[furball4paws]

At least National Geographic had the decency to admit they went Leftist Greenie.

[Cicero]

Fanaticism in defense of ignorance is no excuse, even on April Fool's Day.

"Darwin is God, we worship him, so don't bother us with anything different."