Originally posted by randman
People are taught to beleive in evolution from a very early age so that by the time they become "scientists", it has already been ingrained into them.
Originally posted by randman
Explain how people like me are brought up to believe in evolution, and wind up rejecting it only after more study.
Also, one reason people began to accept evolution is that evolutionists have tended historically to overstate their case and create hoaxes, and such to convince the public and rarely publicize their errors once tey have sold them to the public.
Neanderthal and Haeckel's drawings come to mind as good examples of this. The popular perception of neanderthal is a hunched over pre-human, and you will still hear people call him a missing link or some such. This is the image promoted by evolutionists despite it ebing totally false. Why? Because it was another way to convince the public.
Recapitulation and Haeckel's drawings are another method used by evolutionists to popularize the public, long after it was shown these drawings were faked. Basically, evolutionists still cling to some vestiges of this propoganda by speaking of conserved stages of development and some such. Bottom line is they know this was prime "evidence" that "works" and are loathe to give it up entirely, or admit that it was used to convince generations of otherwise well-educated people.
Originally posted by LouisBooth
"do people like you study it at university level?"
Yup
"Louis Booth, don't even go there, science has handled radical change far better than the church at every step of the way. "
*chuckles* I thought we were talking about just science here? Why is it that when it is criticied people immediatly act in a defensive manner?
Originally posted by randman
Explain how people like me are brought up to believe in evolution, and wind up rejecting it only after more study.
Also, one reason people began to accept evolution is that evolutionists have tended historically to overstate their case and create hoaxes, and such to convince the public and rarely publicize their errors once tey have sold them to the public.
Neanderthal and Haeckel's drawings come to mind as good examples of this. The popular perception of neanderthal is a hunched over pre-human, and you will still hear people call him a missing link or some such. This is the image promoted by evolutionists despite it ebing totally false. Why? Because it was another way to convince the public.
Recapitulation and Haeckel's drawings are another method used by evolutionists to popularize the public, long after it was shown these drawings were faked. Basically, evolutionists still cling to some vestiges of this propoganda by speaking of conserved stages of development and some such. Bottom line is they know this was prime "evidence" that "works" and are loathe to give it up entirely, or admit that it was used to convince generations of otherwise well-educated people.
Originally posted by LouisBooth
"conspiracy theory of science "
Hmm..I think a pyradyme (sp) shift is about what he said. Regardless of its rightness scientists have been known to hold onto popular theories even though more and more things spring up that disagree with it. I personally think such is the case with evolution.
Originally posted by LouisBooth
Its the jump to macro that I don't beleive...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?