|
The point of that article was that based on inconclusive evidence, a bloke went "well, chalk that one up for darwinism" and all the scientists and learned blokes in the world went "yay". Now, since its obvious that the colour change occured due to evolution, other people start doing things like pinning dead moths to trees and taking pictures. these pictures get stuck into science textbooks as proof of evolution. Other scientists examine the peppered moth, and realise that its a load of hogwash, and release findings to say otherwise, that this particular example is not due to evolution. this, in turn is refuted by other scientists doing such activities as quoting inaccurate statistics... And the peppered moth remains in textbooks as an example of evolution.
Anyway, the point im trying to make is that its still a theory. yet, many people just assume its a law, and do all sorts of inexplicable things to make it fit. hardly the behaviour one expects from professional scientists.
It also makes me wonder what else has been, uh, embellished, when presented as proof of evolution.
(Don't get me wrong, im not a big fan of the evolution theory, but its a cursed sight more probable than the theory of creation)
Some scientists are just as guilty as the creationalists.
|