Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gunni
All these discoveries they are always making using fossils and things like that are not that reliable, it is mostly guess work. There are so many gaps in the things that they know that it is pretty hard to be 100% sure about anything.
I read that if everyone in N-America were to die today, something like 3 humans should statistically become fossils (wich goes to show that people researching it afterwards wouldn't have much to work with). We only know about 2% of the creatures that have walked the earth, and evolution is an ongoing thing, perhaps these ants are just a bit slow.
I personally don't think this has any meaning about anuthing
|
You raise an interesting point about statistical representation, however, much of science does rely on interpolation and inferences.
One funny angle of this information is that it does get the ANTI Darwinist (read: creationist) camp in a tizzy. Here's one representative comment:
**Take your pick - either there is no evil Darwinist consipiracy to suppress this kind of information, or this information is consistent with the modern synthesis of evolution... Actually, the truth is "both".
Of course the truth is both. This is why the theory of evolution is not falsifiable. Darwinists are like the Borg - they simply assimilate anything into the theory whether it is consistent with it or not.
"Suppression of information" is not the problem. What Darwinists suppress is any interpretation of the information that is inconsistent with Darwinist dogma.**