Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Magazine)   Everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not to his own facts   ( divider line
    More: Obvious, gifts, opinions  
•       •       •

7611 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Nov 2012 at 5:44 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

303 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

2012-11-11 04:46:01 PM Full Size
2012-11-11 06:46:31 PM  

Ishkur: yousaywut: This entire discussion was based on my attempt to show that some Facts are opinions (from a we should have these questions post).

Well there's your problem: You weren't posting any facts as opinions (they were outright fallacies), and you were asking questions that were settled decades ago. None of what you postulated is a problem to evolutionary theory or science. Those debates were resolved. Everyone's moved on.

But this is par for the course, so its not your fault. Science is moving very VERY fast these days (just as fast as anything else technological) and half the time it forgets to properly inform the public about what it's currently doing while the other half forgets to do crucial things like upgrade high school reading material. Even textbooks that are 20 years old are considered obsolete and deprecated compared to the latest scientific breakthroughs. There is an awful lot of ignorance out there about what evolution actually is, and this is mostly due to inadequate communication and education. If more steps are taken to explain the full process in a more thorough manner to the American people, there wouldn't be so much idiocy.

It's a typical tactic of Creationists to try and disprove evolutionary theory by attacking what it was back in the 19th century because the theory was younger and incomplete back then (pre-discovery of DNA) and hence easier to argue against, which is why they like to use the word "Darwinism", as in a faith belief system founded by Darwin (and that if they discredit Darwin, they discredit evolution.... like a religion). But no one "owns" evolution the way Jesus or any other religious figure "owns", and discrediting Darwin or any kind of advancement or application of the theory a hundred years ago does nothing to hamper its robustness today.

Furthermore, theologians do not seem to understand that the people who attack evolution the most are evolutionary scientists, because science is not dogma, it is a process for studying ...

True and I actually learned quite a bit just from being wrong in this thread so that kind of worked out for me:)
2012-11-11 06:49:04 PM  

abb3w: yousaywut: Thanks, I actually long since have agreed that I was in error but folks keep popping in to tell me I was in error.

Even still with your admission, it still looked like you might learn something from the canned "microevolution versus macroevolution" mini-lecture I keep on the shelf.

yousaywut: At least you were polite about it:)

I try to save major rudeness for really special occasions.

No worries I appreciate the info. Rueened actually sent me a pretty good link where I learned quite a bit before my brain went into overload and I went off to dreamland. All in all a pretty good day for the learnin today.
Displayed 3 of 303 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.