Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GodGunsGuts

You are absolutely correct that Darwin was not a scientist.
He made observations and attempted to explain those observations.

He may have been aware of a gentleman who had theorized much the same about thirty years earlier (White?)

Like I said, our tools and methodology are much sharper than his.


65 posted on 01/30/2009 12:47:41 PM PST by texmexis best (uency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: texmexis best

==Like I said, our tools and methodology are much sharper than his.

That’s the whole point. Our every sharpening tools and methodology are pulling up Darwinian evolution by the roots.

==You are absolutely correct that Darwin was not a scientist. He made observations and attempted to explain those observations.

Actually, he tried to write the entire history of biology based on some minor variations between finches. The fact that the science community abandoned its collective wits and went along with it strikes me as absurd in the extreme.


72 posted on 01/30/2009 1:14:20 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson