Posted on 03/31/2007 1:09:59 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
What's curious about it? The Piltdown hoax is rather well known. Creationists tart it up all the time in order to pretend that it somehow discredits science. Usually they *know* that *scientists* figured it was a fraud from the getgo and proved as much rather quickly, yet they insist on telling the story as if it somehow *discredits* science when in fact it does exactly the opposite. It's not the least bit "curious" that freepers would know this. You think you're the first person to try to pull this stunt here? Not even close.
The ablity of some folks to simply cook up a non-issue like this when confronted with an opinion not one's own is always amusing. But to stick to the point of the thread instead of dodging it, using scientific evidence to "prove" how flawed science is is pretty funny.
If you noticed I just included you with others who made comments which were pinged to me; that wasn't addressed to you, but to the author of the quoted line.
Huh? Facts aren't born from theories. Theories are born from facts. Amusingly, you have it exactly backwards.
What other inane hallucinations occured to you as you read the article? Did you see, fleeting amid the words and sentences, fairies, elves and little blue trolls too?
And how where these "facts" confirmed as facts?...Anyone who spends any real time in the sciences knows that facts are just long accepted theories.
Uh, obviously you didn't even read the article--I was making reference to the comments ABOUT the article in the original posting.
Did you see, fleeting amid the words and sentences, fairies, elves and little blue trolls too?
Wow, you really are damning Darwin with that stunning intellectual debate-thing. Really making your point--what's next, "Sez you!" or "I know evolution's false, God told me so"?
Your post is a giant straw man argument. Completely useless and logically flawed.
What other inane hallucinations occured to you as you read the "comments ABOUT the article in the original posting"? Did you see, fleeting amid the words and sentences, fairies, elves and little blue trolls too?
You're the one who believes in unseen forces, not me.
It's really funny watching your complete inability to back up your silly posting. All whining and anger, no facts, no intelligent debate, just childish insults at those who have called you on your embarassing use OF science to "disprove" science.
Please, continue, it's fun watching a fantasist like yourself try to paddle to shore in his sinking dinghy.
So a faux-engineer from PacBell decides who has 'free will' and who does not?
Maybe he has to reject free will in order to promote his own argument? An argument that postulates a marginal cost to every decision we make.
It's not surprising coming from a MBA economist (which is what Scott Adam is), but it's not very satisfying in either a teleological nor a etiological sense.
Do you guys read posted articles before commenting? It's a good habit. Try it.
Always do. Top-to-bottom, --even when it's creationist garbage.
Very well.
1. use OF science to "disprove" science
2. science is somehow invalid as a field of endeavor
I would ask you to point out where both these peculiar figments of your imagination occur in the original posting. But anyone with common sense can see that the original posting contains nothing of the sort. It is clear, then, that you experienced more than one hallucination after all. Is that it, or is there more? Perhaps a whole pantheon of little devils, gnomes, and nimble sprites, sprinkled with a few bible-quotes, flew by your eyes.
Hey, the accountant said so, so it must be true.
I'm not going to pile on except to state, "Ask your Medical Doctor about Evolution. Please!".
I often find it humorous when the anti-science crowd pulls out Piltdown Man from the dusty past to "prove" that science is wrong and only their pastor is right.
Piltdown proves the validity of science. Even in those earliest days of science - nearly a century ago - it was questioned. That is was proven a fraud is the beauty of science. Scientists are now not only allowed to question, but are expected to question. It is their duty.
When was the last time a religionist was encouraged or even allowed to question the Biblical account of creation?
Please, you're making this so easy for me, it's embarassing.
Your whole point is that Piltdown Man was reported as proof of Darwin's position.
But we all know Piltdown Man was a fraud.
Now, seeing how it was accepted as "fact" for years, what field of endeavor exposed the truth? What was used to show that these remains couldn't possibly be what they were claimed?
Was it the arts? Was it religion, or...was it science?
Endeavor to answer, Fairyman.
Cavemen are still around today, I see them all the time on Geico commercials. And it`s not PC to call them "Cavemen", they don`t appreciate that.
One tends to lead to cult following.
Science isn't invalid as a field of endeavor.
But scientists are often smug and wrong. This article represents one small example.
And not only "science" disproved "science" in the piltdown man saga. Wisdom, which knows the usual outcome of exagerating claims--which understands "pride before the fall"--provides valuable insight into WHY this story occured, and why the claims enumerated in the article might well be destined for "scientific revision".
The hubris of scientists--which runs counter to the explicit caution of the "scientific method"--is, at some level, a mythical elevation of science. There are limits to scientific knowledge that scientists would do well to admit and remember. Specifically, the human spirit, and the existence of God, will always remain beyond the capacity of scientific inquiry to explain.
Scientists should practice fidelity to the modesty of the scientif method. But many don't. The current "scientific consensus" on human-caused global warming, complete with apocalyptic scenarios, is the latest example of "mythic" scientific over-reach.
The problem with scientists usually begins when they come to believe that their field is capable of validating or disqualifying all other areas of human experience and understanding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.