re: #620 Sharmuta

re: #621 Salamantis

Your false premise that scientists are engaged in a conspiracy to validate evolution when the evidence has led the theory to be validated without bias is just absurd.

Now did I ever say there was a conspiracy? Come on there is no conspiracy and no honest reader can say I said there was. What there is is an inversion of processes. Where most scientists say, “well if the universe is expanding in such and such a way, then x”. Evidence is obtained and then we see whether it fits with what we know. In physics this approach has led to the speculations on dark matter and dark energy only very recently.

In evolutionary theory, when facts are surprising, no one EVER asks whether the facts disprove evolutionary theory. In Morphed when talking about whales, you may remember that they predicted the eariest form would live near salt water. But upon examination of teeth, they discovered it was fresh water. They didn’t say “evolution must be wrong because it caused us to predict wrongly.” They asked “where did we go wrong” and not “where did the theory go wrong.” In short, natural selection is assumed and the facts made to fit a narrative. Now I’m not sayig that most of these naratives are wrong — most seem plausible. But for a scientist who is employed by an institution that would be ridiculed for even the slightest heresy, as I am here, it is not easy to look with fresh eyes. One can talk of gradualism v. punctuated advance in evolution, but there is no framework to talk outside of evolution itself, and therein lies the issue.