This link pretty well covers what any alternative theory to Darwinism is up against:
http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/57/65/
I see no reason to repeat what is already there.
One of the issues that page does not address is how would anyone of any repute get his/her theory heard? To apply for a grant from the U. S. government, requires getting past a hand-picked committee that represents the status quo in the science industry. How would one obtain tenure at a university if one did not buy into the prevailing Darwinian theory? Too many “scientists” have their reputations at stake to allow a serious challenge to their “life’s” work.
One small example of rogue scientists eventually making a little headway over the entrenched establishment positiion is in this:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/stoneage/about.html
But, we didn’t get to hear much about that, now, did we?
Couple the difficulty of fighting entrenched reactionaries in the scientific community and the prevalence of political correctness (where is the Kennewick Man?), there is very little chance of of any really new thinking about the orgins of the earth/man getting a fair shot at a hearing.
These same bully boy tactics are being used by the manmade Global Warming crowd. There is “consensus” - the discussion is over.
Hey Doc, you wasted your time again. What a surprise.
http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/57/65/
I see no reason to repeat what is already there.
That site appears to be arguing the creationist position. That is not an alternative scientific theory of evolution. It is a religious belief.
One of the issues that page does not address is how would anyone of any repute get his/her theory heard? To apply for a grant from the U. S. government, requires getting past a hand-picked committee that represents the status quo in the science industry. How would one obtain tenure at a university if one did not buy into the prevailing Darwinian theory? Too many “scientists” have their reputations at stake to allow a serious challenge to their “life’s” work.
One small example of rogue scientists eventually making a little headway over the entrenched establishment positiion is in this:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/stoneage/about.html
But, we didn’t get to hear much about that, now, did we?
Couple the difficulty of fighting entrenched reactionaries in the scientific community and the prevalence of political correctness (where is the Kennewick Man?), there is very little chance of of any really new thinking about the orgins of the earth/man getting a fair shot at a hearing.
Now you are in my field. I am an archaeologist.
There is substantial evidence that Clovis was not first. There seems to have been an early coastal migration, using watercraft, which extended from Alaska to the tip of South America. Here is a good article on some recent research. Some of my own research also supports this early coastal migration.
You mention Kennewick Man: he is being studied more intensively than any other Native American skeleton has ever been studied. I would not doubt that mtDNA will be a part of that study. This came about because scientists sued the government and won both at the trial and appellate court level. I see no attempts to hide the evidence supporting new theories there; rather a very distinguished panel of scientists is working hard to learn what Kennewick Man has to tell us.
As interesting as this discussion is, you have still not specified any scientific theories that the "bully boys" are preventing from challenging the theory of evolution.
Instead you have supplied a link supporting creationism and some examples from archaeology which do not support your claims about them.