Posted on 09/27/2006 9:56:09 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
God.
Thanks.
At least two mistakes.
Piltdown was a hoax which was quickly figured out because it didn't fit. Friedrichs and Weidenreich had both, by about 1932, published their research suggesting the lower jaws and molars were that of an orang. They were correct. The final debunking in the early 1950s was just icing on the cake. And it was paleontologists and other evolutionary specialists who figured it out, not creationists.
Second, you should know that no theory is science is considered "proved." A theory is simply the best explanation we have for the data--and its an explanation that has withstood many tests. There is also the hypothesis, which is an idea which may or may be supported by data, and which has not yet withstood many tests. The theory of evolution passed that stage over a century ago.
Your attempt at humor is noted, but in making these two very noticeable mistakes you have only made yourself look silly.
I LOVE it when your type (you don't mind if I classify you as "your type," do you?) brings up Piltdown Man.
Piltdown Man is a triumph for TToE. As long as there as been science and money associated with it, there have been scam artists who want to take advantage of it for the bucks.
But science itself, in its operational methods, exposed Piltdown Man and showed how was a hoax.
Unbeknownst to many, there are passionate, knock-down, drag out fights within the TToE community about the meaning and proper placement of new AND OLD data as they continue to strive for the proper framework.
And singling out a single (or even several) hoaxes as undermining TToE is like singling out Cold Fusion as undermining Physics.
And now that Pluto isn't a planet, I guess it is time to toss Astronomy out the window.
Now, let us contrast with Religion. And I'll start with Scientology... (need I go on, or will you force me to bring in islam?)
Are Darwinism and Creationism mutually exclusive?
Why couldn't Darwinism be God's mechanism?
Am I overly poetic tonight?
But we can see how the CR/Iders evolve.
They used to bring up Piltdown Man and other Hoaxes as "proof" against TToE. When we turned the argument around and demonstrated how science polices its own (as opposed to religion and other philosophy), they eventually stopped using that so-called "argument." This is, of course, the self-preservation instinct in action.
Those who post hoax-based assertions either leave or cease to do so. Postinian Darwinism in action.
I haven't seen a "Piltdown Man" post in months. So I hope people will forgive my glee. It was like fresh blood to a vampire.
Are Darwinism and Creationism mutually exclusive?
"Creationism" as defined on these threads usually means literal interpretation of Genesis: 7 days means 168 hours as we know them now (a handful accept some vagueness about the "light" thing). Adam and Eve appeared {poof} fully formed with no background (nor clothes).
From that perspective, they are not only mutually exclusive, but TToE is Heresy.
Why couldn't Darwinism be God's mechanism?
Many of us Christians who understand TToE believe that TToE (the CR/IDers tend to substitute the term "Darwinism" for "Evolution" and TTYTT, it doesn't have a lot of meaning) is exactly that: a part of God's plan (look back a few posts for my rather elaborate description of the whole debate).
I read the original post. It may make the point, but it doesn't make sense.
Next time use an analogy with more argumentative elasticity! ;)
Whether or not the American public accepts evolution or not is irrelevant to whether or not evolution is fact. American lack of education, whether they be the product of govenment schools or not, doesn't change the facts of evolution.
I think you have a good handle on it. The theological position of mainstream Christianity and Judaism is that the Lord exists beyond scientific scruitiny. The only conflict that exists between science and faith is that which people manufacture. I personally know many people in the biological sciences who have no problem with the theory of evolution.
TToE = The Theory of Evolution?
CR/IDers = ?
TTYTT = ?
I'm just curious, and a bit lazy (as I do not feature reading through the entire thread), ... do Creationists deny Darwinism?
But we can see how the CR/Iders evolve.
They used to bring up Piltdown Man and other Hoaxes as "proof" against TToE. When we turned the argument around and demonstrated how science polices its own (as opposed to religion and other philosophy), they eventually stopped using that so-called "argument." This is, of course, the self-preservation instinct in action.
Those who post hoax-based assertions either leave or cease to do so. Postinian Darwinism in action.
I haven't seen a "Piltdown Man" post in months. So I hope people will forgive my glee. It was like fresh blood to a vampire.
There are always new converts who have not had some of the facts explained to them. They visit the creationist websites and think they are ready to slay the dragon of Darwinism.
They don't realize that, when it comes to the theory of evolution, the creationist websites are loaded with distortions, omissions, and outright lies.
Piltdown is a good example. The creationist websites will portray this as a fatal blow to the theory of evolution, instead of a deliberate hoax which fooled a few British scientists for a couple of decades--the hoaxer fed them what they wanted to find! That's always a winner.
Much like what the creationist websites feed the believers.
You, my FRiend, have made it into the inner circle that many FReepers aspire to.
You have made it onto my "Potential Tag Line" list.
Tell your family and make a bumper sticker.
Snack proud and strong!
'highly debatable' like what really caused the WTC towers to collapse.
Creationists are much like the WTC conspiracists in terms of their similar passionate achievement of total belief in something that did not happen.
An Aristotelian/Objectivist, OTOH, would have difficulty with accepting any concept beyond those which can be logically proven, eh?
But not in magnitude.
You are describing Galactic Linguists debating the prevalence of "jynnantonnyx."
Thank you very much.
"Here is a squirt gun with lemon juice. Aim for the dragon's Right eye! You will come home with the dragon's skin as a robe!"
LOL -- you have to admit they are cute when they are young.
Thank YOU -- it is a good one and will probably be up in the rotation pretty soon! :)
Thanks... I think.
I'm mainly here for the puns, with the occasional 5-yard penalty for piling on, or offsides, by one group or the other. :-)
Cheers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.