offer an alternative scientific explanation.
2007-11-10 03:11:15 · 14 answers · asked by I'm an Atheist 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Loaded question. Anybody who says they are skeptical of Darwinism without justifying their skepticism is not a scientist.
2007-11-10 03:14:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Let's define some terms: by "Darwinism", I assume that you mean "belief in the infallibility of theories attributed to Charles Darwin." whereas "evolution" would be the word to represent the current state of our knowledge of the development of living things and a "scientist" would be a person who actively studies science.
Scientists are correct in being skeptical of belief-systems, but people who don't offer scientific explanations are probably not scientists.
Charles Darwin was a scientist and his theories were quite well researched and well presented for his time.
Time goes on. Scientific theories continue to develop.
Belief-systems may or may not develop with the passage of time and the addition of new information because beliefs are not information-dependent.
Many "Darwinists" have never read what Darwin wrote.
2007-11-10 11:35:00 · answer #2 · answered by anyone 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is nothing wrong in skepticism, the lack of it should actually be a problem. Being skeptical doesn't mean you deny an idea, it means you just need to know more before you would choose to believe it, or not to believe it.
If there are alternative scientifical explanations for the Darwin theory, I'd love to hear them
2007-11-10 11:18:28 · answer #3 · answered by larissa 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No. The failure to offer an alternative only shows they are thinking and have doubts, they are skeptical because they see "holes" -- unsolved issues with Darwin's theory in their "opinion". It's only natural for that to happen, so, why do they have to offer an alternative? They are just being skeptical... like many people are, not just "scientists". No, it doesn't make me skeptical of them at all, but it does make me think that they are thinking. There actually ARE blank spots and unanswered questions with Darwin's Theory - which are still in the "discovery" phase.
2007-11-10 11:26:53 · answer #4 · answered by Holly Carmichael 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Intelligence builds on intelligence, and ability builds on ability. What we thought 50, 500 and 5,000 years ago looks ridiculous to us now. But back then, everyone thought the conclusions they were reaching were final truths. 50, 500 and 5,000 years from now, if we're still around, what we think today will look stupid as well.
Scientists are good scientists when they remain skeptical of everything. As soon as they form concrete beliefs about a scientific theory, it's only a matter of time before they become outdated.
2007-11-10 11:15:45 · answer #5 · answered by Buying is Voting 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, I'm also skeptical of people who equate engineers with scientists. There is a big diffference as engineers are well trained in the application of science but rarely in its actual practice.
2007-11-10 11:16:07 · answer #6 · answered by MR TT, VT enthusiast 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I think its good to be skeptical to some point- you should question everything once (even the bible) before you believe it.
2007-11-10 11:13:26 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
what's wrong with skepticism????? Are you skeptical of Einstein because he was skeptical of Newton?
2007-11-10 11:15:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Darwin has already been proven false. Come on find something else to base your views on.
2007-11-10 11:22:56 · answer #9 · answered by rikirailrd 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Any scientist that does not know that evolution is fact were not the top of their class, that is for sure. They probably got their diploma at a bible college.
2007-11-10 11:15:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋