[betty boop]

Relating all these insights to Darwin's omissions — the more people know about his family, his affiliations, the reactions to his theory and his own private communications — the more justified they may feel in filling in the blanks. In their minds, it is not a "non sequitur" — but in your mind, it probably is.

Excellent analysis, dearest sister in Christ!

Reasonable people look for context in formulating their ideas. It's the most natural thing to do. Especially when there are profound omissions, or huge gaps, in the evidentiary record. For then the question becomes, Why did this man draw the conclusions he did, despite these omissions? Did he simply "rationalize" them away — or what?

I don't think Darwin did that BTW. He himself recognized that the Achilles Heel of his theory was the fossil record, and said so....

[Alamo-Girl]

Reasonable people look for context in formulating their ideas. It's the most natural thing to do. Especially when there are profound omissions, or huge gaps, in the evidentiary record. For then the question becomes, Why did this man draw the conclusions he did, despite these omissions? Did he simply "rationalize" them away — or what?

So very true!

Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ, and thank you for your encouragements!