One obvious example of the problem with the "theory of evolution:" could "modern humans" produce vial offspring with Neanderthal man? The answer could be yes, under certain circumstances, but no under other circumstances. There is no way to know. But we now know that some "species" can do all kinds of unexpected things, based upon environmental conditions (just today there was this report: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080805192720.htm).
I am not suggesting that we should not study how "cell colonies" like us adapt to the environment. I am stating that there is no reason to "hamstring" ourselves with a concept ("species") that may not be viable (in terms of creating a scientific theory based upon it). I can understand why people of Charles Darwin's time did not question the concept of the species, but there is no reason for people today, in light of evidence that has been generated since Darwin's time, to accept this concept without demanding that it be tested rigorously and in accord with the scientific method. It is not acceptable to have "experts" tell us that certain organisms are members of a specific "species" only to find out, perhaps decades later, that in fact new classifications need to be made. The species concept, does, however, supply a good example of the inability of most scientists to think in a way that is flexible enough to meet various challenges they face. The consequences of this are things like claims about "HIV" being "wily," "mysterious," "cunning," etc., which of course is outright ludicrous. Instead, what may be at least somewhat mysterious is how our "great minds" are unable to consider the possibility that they simply may be wrong, and that they should do what the scientific method demands, which is to reassess a hypothesis or theory if it does not reflect the natural reality. |
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Prev Message
