Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ol' Dan Tucker

"Maybe his was a social promotion."

I'm sure common descent was not an issue that came up in his job interview. Why don't you petition medical and other scientific institutions to screen applicants by having them swear they affirm common descent? My friend couldn't possibly do his job without believing in common descent, right?

He also said he knew many others who share his view. I personally do not work in that field, so I do not know first hand.

Universal common descent is nonessential to any science. What consequences would there be of it being untrue?

Apparently there are more than a few fervent believers in universal common descent who elevate it to the level of causality or logic or mathematics. It is not just a tenet of their science, it is an axiom of it. It is the measure of all else.


74 posted on 02/01/2006 12:26:40 PM PST by unlearner (You will never come to know that which you do not know until you first know that you do not know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: unlearner
Why don't you petition medical and other scientific institutions to screen applicants by having them swear they affirm common descent?

Will they have a better sense of humor?

75 posted on 02/01/2006 12:30:25 PM PST by Ol' Dan Tucker (Karen Ryan reporting...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

To: unlearner
Universal common descent is nonessential to any science. What consequences would there be of it being untrue?

The 16S ribosomal phylogenetic tree would make no sense. Why, if we are descended from two separately created organisms, do all our ribosomes fall on a single phylogenetic tree?

95 posted on 02/01/2006 1:49:01 PM PST by Right Wing Professor (When your mind's made up, nothing's more confusing than lots and lots and lots of facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

To: unlearner
Universal common descent is nonessential to any science. What consequences would there be of it being untrue?

Baby Fae
Bailey's use of baboons was somewhat surprising, given their relatively distant evolutionary relationship to humans compared to other primates. The reason came to light when the Times of London published an interview between Bailey and an Australian radio crew. The reporters had been forbidden to ask direct questions about the operation, so they queried Bailey on the issue of why he had chosen a baboon in view of the baboon's evolutionary distance from humans. Bailey replied, "Er, I find that difficult to answer. You see, I don't believe in evolution."6

168 posted on 02/01/2006 4:28:42 PM PST by Oztrich Boy (Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pascal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson