RE: Creationism and Ignorance
May 3, 2018 at 10:25 am
(This post was last modified: May 3, 2018 at 10:28 am by FatAndFaithless.)
...Because evolution hasn't been communicated very effectively to the lay public? That's what the whole thread is about. There's an overwhelming consensus among scientists that evolution is true. That is a fact. There's evidence and data to support that, and that evidence has been reproducible for a looooong time now.
Even if you don't accept evolution, even if you think scientists don't know what they're talking about, even if you don't understand the first thing about scientific theories - you have to concede that AMONG SCIENTISTS there is a huge consensus, and the scientific community is not divided on the controversial topic of "is evolution true?" Trying to suggest that science is being vitiated by creationist claims or that there are large contingents of scientific fields that reject evolution is simply lying.
I'm not talking about the public perception of a consensus (public perception is often garbage) - all I'm saying is that you, Alpha, after seeing this data, must concede that scientists overwhelmingly agree on the fact of evolution.
Even if you don't accept evolution, even if you think scientists don't know what they're talking about, even if you don't understand the first thing about scientific theories - you have to concede that AMONG SCIENTISTS there is a huge consensus, and the scientific community is not divided on the controversial topic of "is evolution true?" Trying to suggest that science is being vitiated by creationist claims or that there are large contingents of scientific fields that reject evolution is simply lying.
I'm not talking about the public perception of a consensus (public perception is often garbage) - all I'm saying is that you, Alpha, after seeing this data, must concede that scientists overwhelmingly agree on the fact of evolution.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
- Thomas Jefferson