What? Darwin’s followers did not use junk DNA as an argument for their position?
|November 22, 2013||Posted by News under 'Junk DNA', News|
For whatever reason, I had written
(Soon we will be hearing from all quarters that Darwin’s followers never really said it was junk. If this blog disappeared, would you know any different?)
Curiously, it attracted someone (Gassaway) who absolutely insists, in the face of evidence, that Darwin’s followers did not use alleged junk DNA in the genome as an argument for their position. One of the mods began to refer to the scene as the Troll Hour. There are currently nearly 250 comments.
Guess it was people who looked, acted, and sounded just like well-known defenders of Darwin, held the same positions, and published under their names then.
By all means, check out the ID Facebook page, especially now that Telic Thoughts has teeled into the Wayback Machine.
Question for readers here: Is it a sign of weakness in the Darwinians’ position that they can’t acknowledge that they made mistakes? They seem to have to defend, then deny.
Albert Einstein is said according to one reckoning to have made 23 significant mistakes but he is still Einstein. By contrast, lesser and less secure figures err, their followers are often expected to cover up for them.
Does it come down to: Do we find evidence, or do we impose dogma and then select or announce the evidence for it?
In the first case finding out that one was wrong about a few things isn’t as big an issue because one is still on the right track just by knowing what is correct.
In the second case, unco-operative facts must be tamed or made to disappear. All the better if they are historical facts that can just drop down the memory hole. People who obstruct that process are enemies.
Thoughts? – O’Leary for News