Please...wait till after the election to bring up this FR ripper.
Here in MA, you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting one of those Darwin emblems (fish with feet) on the back of a Prius.
Standing by with popcorn.
Good article.
Contrast this on-going battle over Darwin with the fate of the other great scientific revolutions. The same Christian fundamentalists who argue that public school should teach creationism have no quarrel with the Copernican revolution. No one argues that public schools should be forced to teach the Ptolemaic system because it permits Joshua to make the sun stand still.They don't argue with sun-centered systems now. They've given up on that one. Now.
But for a thousand years or so they most definitely argued against sun-centered astronomical theories. Most definitely did.
Compared to the barriers to sun-centered astronomy, natural selection is still very young. But it too will finally be accepted as the truth that it is.
Actually we have some on this website arguing for a geocentric view (i.e., denying the Copernican heliocentric view).
Darwin has “evolved” into ambient temperature dust.
The audio track to this would have to be Johnny Weissmuller doing his classic "Tarzan" yell.
Speaking of Darwin:-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ammo Dumps
2007 Personal Account (From Darwin Awards site)
(2003, Iraq) Securing an Iraqi ammunition holding area became a bit of a problem when my unit took over this large piece of real estate. Looters periodically showed up to steal brass from the tank and artillery rounds stored in the bunkers. These guys had simple tools: HAMMERS and CHISELS. And, as 98% of Iraqis smoke, this made for an even more interesting day.
One day we saw five looters sneak into a bunker. As we made our way towards the bunker to apprehend them, the bunker exploded. It was a few days before we could get close to the demolished bunker. When we were able to investigate, we ascertained that the looters had either struck a spark while hitting a tank round with hammer and chisel, or one or all were enjoying their finest tobacco while striking the tank round. Either way, the outcome was the demise of five insurgents.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Why still arguing about Darwinism?”
For the same reason many humans believe in reincarnation, many others in the 72 virgins tale, many others that if you take their photograph you take their soul: atavistic tradition blended with early and lifelong indoctrination.
sNaP!
“The stumbling block to an acceptance of Darwin, I would like to submit, has little to do with Christian fundamentalism, but a whole lot to do with our intense visceral revulsion at monkeys and apes.”
Comedy?
The problems with Darwinism as a “theory” are mathematical and biochemical. Darwin’s hypothesis runs into unsurmountable obstacles when confronted with simple modern arguments.
Essentially Darwinism is just another discredited “origin myth”. People simply want to believe that they “understand” what is going on when they simply don’t.
Should a woman drive a car with a Darwin decal after what he had to say about women?
Man is more courageous, pugnacious and energetic than woman, and has a more inventive genius. His brain is absolutely larger, but whether or not proportionately to his larger body, has not, I believe, been fully ascertained.
The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn by man’s attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman- whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands.
We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on Hereditary Genius, that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of woman. Thus, man has ultimately become superior to woman. It is, indeed, fortunate that the law of the equal transmission of characters to both sexes prevails with mammals; otherwise, it is probable that man would have become as superior in mental endowment to woman, as the peacock is in ornamental plumage to the peahen.
That is, the sun apparently stood still. Read this:
In the Mexican Annals of Cuauhtitlan - the history of the empire of Culhuacan sn Mexico, written in Nahua-Indian in the sixteenth century - it is related that during a cosmic catastrophe that occurred in the remote past, the night did not end for a long time.It's from Immanual Velikovsky's Worlds in Collision. It made me stand up and take notice more than 40 years ago.
ML/NJ
Maybe those that have bought into darwin's theory can explain why the primary mechanism of evolution (mutation followed by natural selection) doesn't work: http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/10mut10.htm ) I'm a scientist and have changed my mind about what I was force-fed during undergrad and grad school about evolution.
If Darwin was correct, how do we explain gays?
(ask that of any liberal, be sure they aren’t drinking fluids when you do so, however)