Comment Re: Well good (Score 1) 2443
First, evolution is philosophy, not science. It is not demonstrable, repeatable or reproducible. (If you think it is, please give me the precise instructions by which I can take simple elements and produce a living creature.) Science cannot answer the question of origins, it is strictly the realm of philosophy. One would hope though that we would base our personal philosophies upon things that have substantial evidence.
When you take into account the fact that there has never been shown to be a single beneficial mutation, they have always been detrimental and often fatal either to the initial individual or to their immediate offspring, that spontaneous generation was disproved centuries ago, that there have been no aquired traits passed on (such as the long necks of those that put rings around their necks to stretch them, and yet their offspring are born with normal neck length, or mice whose tails were cut off for many generations ant yet, the offspring were still born with tails) and that the fundamental assumptions regarding radiometric age dating have been proved false, (decay rates have been shown to change when pressure, temperature, electric and megnetic fields and monomolecular layer stress, change. Many other factors can affect each of the different methods, and other assumptions are quite clearly false, i.e. no daughter products present, closed system with no possible contamination, etc.), it would seem that evolution does not have enough evidence to be taught in a philosophy class either.
When you take into account the fact that there has never been shown to be a single beneficial mutation, they have always been detrimental and often fatal either to the initial individual or to their immediate offspring, that spontaneous generation was disproved centuries ago, that there have been no aquired traits passed on (such as the long necks of those that put rings around their necks to stretch them, and yet their offspring are born with normal neck length, or mice whose tails were cut off for many generations ant yet, the offspring were still born with tails) and that the fundamental assumptions regarding radiometric age dating have been proved false, (decay rates have been shown to change when pressure, temperature, electric and megnetic fields and monomolecular layer stress, change. Many other factors can affect each of the different methods, and other assumptions are quite clearly false, i.e. no daughter products present, closed system with no possible contamination, etc.), it would seem that evolution does not have enough evidence to be taught in a philosophy class either.
