I hadn't run in this before, which is not surprising since I took a bit of time away from blogging, but after it being pointed out to me on Facebook, I just have to add it to my collection. It's from Evolution's Refusal to Die". It ties well into things I like to say, like science's self-correcting nature. I do love this line:
"Evolution is no more ill than heliocentricity, atomic theory or quantum mechanics is ill."and his closing:
"The historical lesson is clear, even if the anti-evolutionists can't see it: Science is open to correction. In the event that evolution does become a "theory in crisis," we will read about that in Scientific American, Nature and Science, not the blogs of the anti-Darwinian culture warriors."I, and many others, have said time and time again that when you look back at all the things Creationists like to point out as weaknesses in science, like Piltdown Man or Cold Fusion, you will find that it certainly wasn't the armchair Creationist that discovered the problem, but other scientists replicating the work. When you see the advancement of science from Newton to Einstein and beyond, again the armchair Creationist were nothing but a nay-sayer and the actual work was again done by real scientists, not folks like those at Answers in Genesis (AiG), the Institute for Creation Research (ICR), or the Discovery Institute (DI). I have asked and no one has bothered answering, what scientific advancement can you point to that had Creationism at its core? Not a single one! Pointing out historical scientists that may or may not have been theists is not the same thing. What scientific advancement can you lay at Creationism's door, not a single one! Should make you think, shouldn't it?
If ever the current Theory of Evolution is replaced by a better, more encompassing explanation, it's not one dreamed up by theists as a way to bolster their own faith in their particular religion, but by real scientists, doing actual science, in accordance with methodology that doesn't require the actions of a deity.