Darwinian Daydreaming
Scientists interpret data and make arguments according to their worldview, we all get that. But if you saddle up and ride over to the Darwin Ranch by Deception Pass, you'll notice the aroma of mental synapses short-circuiting. Why? Because the scientific evidence is downright hostile to evolution, but they have to keep their phony-baloney jobs.
This interpretation of the evidence goes well into begging the question and other logical fallacies. F'rinstance, evolutionary scientists assume evolution in the first place, asking how something evolved rather than if something evolved. Then they wonder why they don't have plausible models. Creationary scientists do not have to resort to extreme speculations that they have to present as "science".
In the reports at the link, look for the rock-solid scientific terms like maybe, could have, convergent evolution, accelerated evolution, possibly, and so on. Fact is, making assertions that sound scientific do not make something scientific. Unfortunately, the gullible faithful take these speculations and run with them. To read the reports, click on "Darwinism as All-Purpose Fiction Plot".
Evolutionary scientists are getting worse at offering "maybe" and circular reasoning as evidence of evolution. Perhaps they are getting desperate because the science is increasingly hostile to evolution?
 |
| Image generated at Atom-Smasher |
In the reports at the link, look for the rock-solid scientific terms like maybe, could have, convergent evolution, accelerated evolution, possibly, and so on. Fact is, making assertions that sound scientific do not make something scientific. Unfortunately, the gullible faithful take these speculations and run with them. To read the reports, click on "Darwinism as All-Purpose Fiction Plot".
Evolutionary scientists are getting worse at offering "maybe" and circular reasoning as evidence of evolution. Perhaps they are getting desperate because the science is increasingly hostile to evolution?