Do you know that you are victimizing scientists when you read and BELIEVE your biology book?

Question

Here is a comment re. that "horse series" evolution found in most Biology books.

FEAR TO SPEAK—Even though scientists may personally doubt evolutionary theory and the evidence for it, yet publicly they fear to tell the facts, lest it recoil on their own salaried positions. One fossil expert, when cornered publicly, hedged by saying the horse series "was the best available example of a transitional sequence." We agree that it is the best available example. But it is a devastating fact that the best available example is a carefully fabricated fake.
"Dr. Eldredge [curator of the Department of Invertebrates of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City] called the textbook characterization of the horse series ‘lamentable.’
"When scientists speak in their offices or behind closed doors, they frequently make candid statements that sharply conflict with statements they make for public consumption before the media.

We agree that it is the best available example. But it is a devastating fact that the best available example is a carefully fabricated fake.
"Dr. Eldredge [curator of the Department of Invertebrates of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City] called the textbook characterization of the horse series ‘lamentable.’
"When scientists speak in their offices or behind closed doors, they frequently make candid statements that sharply conflict with statements they make for public consumption before the media. For example, after Dr. Eldredge made the statement [in 1979] about the horse series being the best example of a lamentable imaginary story being presented as though it were literal truth, he then contradicted himself.

Sorry for the redundant phrases. I thought it would not fit.

Do not give as proof the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION!! people. That according to Darwin is the biggest proof denying EVILUTION. If you don't know what the CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION is type it on search portion of Yahoo or Google.

Answer 1

Science is based on fact alone and evolution isn't so yes it does make scientist look bad. Science needs to return to documented research, fact and plausible theories.

Answer 2

Obviously you're not asking a question, you just want to make a controversial statement and get some Christians riled. Apparently you're not good at research. The dead sea scrolls date much of the old testament at least to 300 years before Christ. The gospels weren't written until about 20-30 years after Jesus died. There are some facts in a biology book, except evolution. Even evolutionists say "well, there are some gaps in the theory." You never here a missionary say "well, there are some gaps in our faith." Evolution is a religion perpetuated by atheists because they have nothing else to lean on. Are you so blind to see that mainly atheists believe in evolution?

Answer 3

The textbooks take a complex tree of branches and dead ends and make it into a line. The fact that textbooks are watered down does not refute the facts. The fact that American History textbooks are watered down does not mean that Columbus did not cross the Atlantic. Similarly, some museum pieces are hybrids (hence the unattributed quote). It does not make the fossil record false.

As for your comment on Charles Darwin denouncing the Cambrian explosion, yes, he dedicated a chapter in Origin of Species to the sudden appearance of thousands of new forms. He could not explain the findings. Of course, some of the best evidence came from the Burgess Shale starting in 1909, 17 years after Darwin's death.

I am glad I am a scientist. I look at facts, rather than make them up on the spot. I don't have to take quotes out of context then make sweeping generalizations about them. I am not afraid to speak.

Answer 4

There is plenty of evidence that suggest evolution's credence. The problem is that it is just that.....evidence.

A scientist would know that any evidence that is valid (the fossil being tangible), cannot simply be discarded.

The horse series is just one of many. Archeopteryx, the lung fish, ceolacanth, etc, etc. Archeopteryx alone speaks volumes....that is unless you've seen a bird with claws on its upper arms or teeth in its mouth.

Trying to dismiss evidence just isn't scientific. Put together, all the fossils found so far suggest that animals have evolved over time. Look at the bigger picture...do you really think we will ever find a complete set evolved over several million years? Do you have any notion how small that possibility is?

Not finding everything to satisfy doesn't change the fact that evolution is theory.

It's evidence....not meant to be destroyed unless you're a movie star accused of murder.

Answer 5

Why would scientists "fake" evidence to support one theory they believe to be wrong, while modifying or scrapping many other theories in light of new evidence? In other words, why would men and women who have spent many years and dollars becoming qualified as scientists act as scientists in dealing with every scientific theory but one, and act totally the opposite where one scientific theory is concerned? It is absurd to even suggest such a thing. Especially since any scientist who proposed a viable alternative theory that took into consideration all the available evidence would become world famous overnight!

Answer 6

well all I can say is that science books are sometimes wrong, though I think your question goes a little deeper than this. Actually I'm not quite sure what your question is getting at. It's interesting that you attempt to disprove evolution, but I think it doesn't really matter since we are all humans right now.

Quantum theory has applicable uses and IMHO will make science fiction reality, but what good does evolution do? Or Creationism? Not that I'm knocking you, but seriously, who cares if we evolved or were created? We're here.

In my opinion I have no opinion, because listening to people rant and complain about evolution or creationism leads me to have to take a compromise. It was both. God created the universe and the universe evolved.

thanks for the thumbs down. TFTTD

Answer 7

Scientists should be taken down a notch for denying reality. They're held to a higher standard of comprehension. If they can't accept the theory and fact of evolution, they have something else going on besides rationality.

Answer 8

"Even though scientists may personally doubt evolutionary theory and the evidence for it, yet publicly they fear to tell the facts, lest it recoil on their own salaried positions."

Stop it. Do you realize how famous a scientist would become if he could legitimately disprove evolution? He'd win awards all over the place, fame, instant recognition, everything. It'd be the greatest discovery in recent memory, if he could do it. The good scientists would JUMP at that chance. But notice how no one's doing it?

Answer 9

Why did you post this under religion if you are arguing about science?

And how do you know what they say behind closed doors if they are behind closed doors,eh?

And who fabricated a series of horse fossils? One evil scientist, or all of them as the world collective of evil leftist plotting scientists got together at their weekly thursday night meeting, and voted on fabricating fossil evidence?

Answer 10

When you can disprove the flurry of *other* fossils that show the *exact same sequence* that have been found since the 1970's, come back and chat.

Answer 11

This is more Creationist nonsense.

Scientific theory does not work like religious dogma. If you find one flaw in dogma, you have to throw the whole thing out.

One of science's strengths is that it can be falsified, and through falsification it grows.