APOLOGY IN ORDER -
I am waiting for an apology. Everyone connected with the progression of evolution
should now formally apologize not only to me, but to all others subjected for so
long to this "theory" of science. Talk about your oxymorons!!
With a big "oops," scientists have discovered that Neanderthal man--the sole link
from man to monkey-- is not linked to man after all. With DNA testing from a Neanderthal's
fossil, scientists discovered that there are significant differences between man
and what many have contended is our ancestor. Monkey Man is not our great grandaddy.
Hmm. so let me get this straight. Scientists have no evidence that man has ever evolved
at all. Or for that matter, scientists have no evidence that any species has ever
evolved into another species? Sure, they have loads of evidence of species evolving
or adapting within themselves but, there is still no living, breathing example of a
true evolution from one species to another. No matter which way you dissect it, there
are still no "transitional forms."
The great thing about natural science is, time has no bearing on it's truths. If you
get too close to the sun, you get hot. That is true a million years ago, it is true
now. Yet, for some reason the active process of evolution doesn't take place now
like it did back then? Why not? Is there less a desire of the species to survive now? No.
That is why they evolved supposedly, to survive. I would have failed science class
if I ever presented an argument as weak as that one.
Science is simply following the time honored tradition taught by the church in the
dark ages. Keep the knowledge at a distance from the common man. In the early churches,
the common man was "delivered" the Word of God. Was the common man not intellectual
enough to understand? No. The churches reasoning was pragmatic, "If we can keep man
dependent upon us for the truth, we can manipulate the truth to our liking. At least
the church had a reformation. Today science still likes to take the stance, "It is
our job to understand the world, we will deliver what it means to you."
So what is going to be taught in school now? The science community is already giving
their new theories about how modern man and Neanderthal man are connected, but I
really don't want to hear it. As it stands right now, science has diddly; just theories.
Hey, I got theories.
The heart of this debate has never really been about empirical evidence. Over the
years, it has boiled down to just another conflict over who is at center of the universe,
God or man. The scientific community, in an effort to deal solely with facts automatically dismissed God because you must have faith. Yet, the alternative they have offered
is so fettered with problems and unanswered questions, that you wind up having to
have more faith in their science than you would ever have to have in religion.
The only sustantial argument that they offer is that their theory is more logical.
Again, this is at odds with their own rules. No matter how logical, science still
lacks proof. The argument of religion is that there needs to be no proof. Which makes
more sense now?
It's not that I want anyone to admit that any certain way to believe is the right
way. But, I just want the world of science to get their heads out of their beakers
and admit they don't know the answers anymore than "we" stupid people do.
sensible
Billy Murphy