Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In Forums

Quote# 56951

What's all this talk about the "facts" of macroevolution? It's a historical science. It took place in the past. It's more forensic than empirical. We look to the fossil record for evidence, not facts, and all evidence is open to interpretation. It should be debated in a court room, not a science lab

John Chaikowsky, Timesonline 41 Comments [1/24/2009 7:30:05 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: Orlor
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2
#865553
John

It should be debated in a court room, not a science lab

It was. You lost. See Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.

1/24/2009 4:47:33 PM
#865604
Osiris

Evolution and ID were debated in a court room. ID lost.

1/24/2009 6:01:08 PM
#865614
Antichrist


1/24/2009 6:16:47 PM
#865619
Canadiest

And that in the courtroom they'd bring in? Who else, but experts in the relative field, same battle, different location, you're STILL wrong

1/24/2009 6:21:14 PM
#865626
Berny

Do you realize that this cuts two ways? Why don't we take your Creation myths and give them a healthy hearing in court? You go ahead and bring all your empirical evidence of Creation and God. Bear in mind the Bible is not evidence.
Loser agrees to shut the fuck up forever more on the subject.

1/24/2009 6:28:13 PM
#865649
werewolf

If you're making an argument, John, knowing the definitions of the words you use would be of immense help. Otherwise, you risk confirming to your audience that you are a pompous and ignorant git.

1/24/2009 6:49:51 PM
#865657
toth

MACROEVOLUTION IS MICROEVOLUTION. MICROEVOLUTION IS MACROEVOLUTION. GET IT RIGHT, MOTHERFUCKERS.

1/24/2009 6:57:09 PM
#865896
Old Viking

Dover.

1/24/2009 9:29:22 PM
#866016
atrasicarius

It's been debated in a court room. You got your asses handed to you.

1/24/2009 10:31:04 PM
#866069
David B.

@Rat of Steel: "Mentioning the word "macroevolution" = automatic 5, automatic fail."

Perhaps you should tell the AAAS, who held a conference called "Macroevolution" in 1983, or Doug Erwin of the National Museum of Natural History, whose article "Macroevolution: Seeds of Diversity" appeared in the journal Science, in 2005. Actually, you'd better write to the editors of Science, PNAS, Nature, Cell and a couple of dozen other journals, since they regularly publish peer-reviewed papers using the term hence must have been infiltrated by creationist moles in deep cover.

1/24/2009 10:59:59 PM
#866082
David B.

"It's a historical science. It took place in the past. It's more forensic than empirical."

All experiments take place in the past, the trick is predicting the result before you see it.

And "forensic" means "relating to legal proceedings", hence "forensic science" is science pursued in aid of a legal end, "forensic dentistry" is identification of an individual through their teeth for investigative purposes, "forensic computing" is the analysis of information technology equipment for evidence in relation of a crime, etc.

But what the fuck is "forensic macroevolution"?

"Your honour, I put it to the jury that the accused did wilfully descend from a species of primitive hominid with a more upright stance so as to be able to strike the victim about the top of the head with a stick without needing to support himself upon his knuckles! This clearly indicates hundreds of thousands of years of planning and forethought went into this crime, hence we are calling for "Murder One"!"

1/24/2009 11:09:04 PM
#875620
emau99

[It should be debated in a court room, not a science lab]

IT WAS. For details, look up Kitzmiller vs. the Dover Board of Education. Please try to keep up.

1/30/2009 6:10:35 PM
#1096560
JB Mason

"It should be debated in a court room," so we can cry about activist judges when we lose.

1/17/2010 12:05:09 AM
#1351868
Quantum Mechanic

Scopes

Look it up moron.

11/25/2011 7:58:58 AM
#1351898
Anon-e-moose

"What's all this talk about the "facts" of macroevolution? It's a historical science. It took place in the past."

The bacteria that feeds on Nylon. A man-made material that didn't exist before the 20th Century.

In recent years (here in the 21st Century): MRSA.

NEXT!

"It should be debated in a court room, not a science lab"

Has someone here got cloth ears? Apart from that being decided six years ago in Kitzmiller vs. Dover (which a certain group of so-called 'people' are still in that river in Egypt about), the question has been answered. Ergo, I said 'NEXT!'

11/25/2011 10:37:04 AM
#1424277


Then please come up with an alternate explanation that would cause that same evidence instead of complaining about the one you don't like.

7/16/2012 5:15:46 PM
1 2