21
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 43:
Line 43: + + +
Talk:Deliberate ignorance (view source)
Revision as of 21:52, March 22, 2011
, 21:52, March 22, 2011→Evolution of whales
::::::::::::::I looked at those links also. The first one called it an "unfinished story," the second one is a link to Wikipedia, the third is a YouTube video, and so on. Those links are a far cry from openminded, rigorous science.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:56, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::I looked at those links also. The first one called it an "unfinished story," the second one is a link to Wikipedia, the third is a YouTube video, and so on. Those links are a far cry from openminded, rigorous science.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:56, 22 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::@Karajou: I say again: I am not saying that evolution ought to be accepted. This thread is about a specific alleged example of deliberate ignorance. I am trying to elicit exactly what it is about this particular example that smacks of deliberate ignorance.
:::::::::::::::@Aschafly: If you had read the links when you posted your comment of 22 March then I cannot understand how you could have written: "Darwin recognized this as a serious problem, and suggested that whales evolved from black bears swimming. No more plausible ancestor has been suggested ever since". In all seriousness, are you suggesting that the black bear theory is the most plausible theory yet? Clearly, looking at those links, a number of fossils have been discovered since Darwin's time and a far more detailed and, on its face, far more plausible evolutionary path has been suggested. And isn't the fact that some evolutionists refer to it as an "unfinished story" indicative of open enquiring minds rather than deliberate ignorance? Working from within the evolutionary paradigm, just what is it about the proposed evolutionary path that is indicative of deliberate ignorance. I think it would be appropriate at this stage if you could provide specific details. --[[User:CecilQ|CecilQ]] 17:52, 22 March 2011 (EDT)