Re: Shh! - a quiet admission

Bodester (
Wed, 17 Mar 1999 23:39:44 -0500

>Now, with the revelations of errors made by Evolutionists concerning the
>peppered moths, we have yet another example of how Evolutionists create
>"just so" stories with little regard for reality or science. If they
>can't get a living textbook example right, how are we to trust them with
>bone fragments dug up from the ground?

Be very careful there to not throw out someone's work because of one
mistake. I'm not saying I dis/agree with evolutionistic theorizing, but be
careful to not entirely abandon a field that may have at least a grain of
truth in it.

>BTW, real science stands up to time -- there is no 40 year limit of
>reliability. Today's Evolutionist beliefs will be 40-years-old in 40
>years. If history is any track record, get an early start and just assume
>that all their stories are false. Even Gould knows that Time is the enemy
>of Evolution stories.
History may be a track record, but where would we be if we always focused on
what history told us? Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo never would have
bothered to propose their ideas.

Lets go back a bit farther. Jesus would be considered simply a religious
fanatic who CLAIMED to be the Christ as others had done before and have been
since. This may sound outrageous, but judging theories by the failures that
came before them goes against science! Science IS the adjustment of theories
that 'don't work' to fit new discoveries, not the total abandonment of a
good idea.