[–] Master_Foo 6 points 35 points (+41|-6) ago 

“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

Signing this statement is nearly meaningless to a scientist. Even an Evolutionary Biologist is going to agree that there should be "skepticism" and "Careful Examination". That's what science IS.

Accepting such a statement isn't even an admission that you disagree with the current evidence.

I'd sign this, and I'm firmly in the opinion that Darwinian Evolution is currently the best model to describe how things are.

But, here's the deal. This is creationist theater. This isn't really a move to discredit Darwinism. This is a move to manipulate people who aren't intellectually nimble enough to make the observation I just made. This is to parade in front of a congregation of fundies who lack the critical thinking skills to actually analyse what is being said here.

Some dumb hick is going to read this and think that because scientists are doing their job and questioning everything, that somehow that is the same as scientists disagreeing with it.

Don't fall for these games of semantics.

[–] Crackrocknigga 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

You're exactly right, the statement in layman's terms basically said "we acknowledge there is a scientific precedent, but we don't believe science has all the answers yet." Any intelligent scientist would say the same.

[–] Dr_Shekel_Nigger 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

And 1000 “scientists” is nothing. If this were 1000 cum laude graduates from MIT, that’d be one thing...but just “scientist” doesn’t mean much

[–] Lundynne 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Did you read the article? This is 1000 people holding a Ph.D in one of the natural sciences or an M.D and serving as a professor of Medicine.

[–] youareivan 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

1000 since 2001 to boot. that's 59 a year. i could get 59 people to sign a statement that says this post will heal the sick in an hour.

[–] kneo24 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

The same thing is done for climate science as well.

[–] Fattynextdoor 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

Underrated post.

[–] bdmthrfkr [S] 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

Posted in v/politics because science has become inherently political.

[–] anamazonslittle 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

And here's why that's a good thing.

[–] Crayonall9t 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

Here comes the flat earthers..

[–] GnashingOfTheTeeth 5 points 4 points (+9|-5) ago 

Its flat and unmoving just like the bible says. Evolution is fake and gay

[–] Master_Foo 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago 

Jesus was a Jew.

[–] CowWithBeef 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

It's almost as if polling scientists isn't science.

[–] A_M_Swallow 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Remember what Darwin called the book he on 24 November 1859 "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life".

Evolution is a learning system. The natural selection part gets rid of the ideas that do not work. Random mutation is the source of the ideas, most of which do nothing or make things worse.

[–] markrod420 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

gotta do something about that pesky racist evolution.

[–] UsedToBeCujoQuarrel 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

How many of those 'Scientists' are real 'Scientists'

[–] bdmthrfkr [S] 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

All of them have PHDs in hard science (biology, math etc.) from recognized Universities.

[–] coinphrase 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

I wonder how many are (((scientists)))

[–] plankO 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

And rightly so, Darwin was primitive at best. Evolutionary theory has evolved greatly since then

[–] Scablifter 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Has it? I would like to know more, Darwin admitted that his natural selection theory was not the only mechanism at work with evolution, what else is there?

[–] Master_Foo 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

When Darwin came up with his theory, he didn't have any real way to prove it, he was just making an observation. This is normal. Often times new technologies need to be invented to confirm an idea. Darwin didn't have the technology at hand to confirm his own ideas.

Fast forward 150 years and now we have plenty of ways to confirm his model. We can confirm it with Phylogenetics, Genetics, Paleontology, Microbiology, Statistics, Even Computer Science adapts the genetic algorithm model for evolving AI. Countless disciplines have been able to verify the Darwinian model in ways Darwin could never even imagine.

So, yes, Evolutionary theory has evolved since Darwin's time. We have a far better understanding than he ever did.

[–] plankO 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Genetics really. I'm sure YouTube has modern how evolution works videos if you're curious

load more comments ▼ (8 remaining)