Fire the Useless Darwinists
Science will gain more respect if it terminates the Darwinians.
They could serve society better as truck drivers or laundry workers.
As you look at the following news items from science news outlets this month, ask if Darwinian evolutionary theory contributes anything of value to society. Any reliable scientific knowledge? Any ways to improve life? Any awe-inspiring motivations to engage in science?
Squid and human brains develop the same way despite diverging 500 million years ago (Live Science, 16 Jan 2023). The animation of squid embryos vibrating is eye-catching, but does evolution contribute anything here? Reporter Ben Turner poses this conundrum:
It seems that the blueprint for complex brain development remains the same, despite 500 million years of divergent evolution.
“It seems.” Stop right there. It seems to whom? Did evolutionists expect this? Does this fit with their theory at all? What possible use comes from the speculation that squid and humans hit on the same brain development pattern after hundreds of millions of Darwin Years supposedly separating their independent paths of presumed evolutionary progress?
One might as well quit reading after seeing that subtitle to Turner’s article quoted above; the rest builds a case for evolution on sand.
Engineers can use similar programs in diverse projects; that would make sense. But the Darwinian evolutionary angle here is nuts.
Madagascar mouse lemur retroviruses are diverse and surprisingly similar to ones found in polar bears or domestic sheep (Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Biological Research, 13 Jan 2023). Ask chief storyteller Sharon Kessler, “What do you know?” Answer: from an evolutionary point of view, nothing.
The polar bear virus is young from an evolutionary point of view whereas the lemur virus is old. “How these related viruses infected such geographically separated species is unclear”, Kessler says.
The retroviruses studied at Leibniz Institute are from very different mammals on different continents. Moreover, the evolutionists believe they “evolved” their genetic signatures millions of years apart. What did evolutionary theory contribute to this “unclear” speculation?
Most humans haven’t evolved to cope with the cold, yet we dominate northern climates – here’s why (The Conversation, 16 Jan 2023). Principal speculators Laura Buck and Kyoko Yamaguchi would serve their fellow man better as truck drivers or laundry workers. They believe that naked humans lacked the brains to cover up in the cold, even though controlled use of fire goes back (in their scheme) over a million Darwin Years. Good grief. Again, ask: what do they know? Their belief system forces them to think that human ancestors were tropical descendants of apes who couldn’t evolve fur fast enough, and were too dumb to realize it’s cold outside in snow without clothes.
It’s still a bit of a mystery how these hominins survived the tough conditions that were so different from their ancestral African homelands….
Evidence for deliberate campfires at this time is contentious. Tools for tailoring fitted, weather-proof clothes don’t appear in western Europe until almost 850,000 years later. Many animals migrate to avoid seasonal cold, but the Happisburgh hominins would have had to travel about 800km south to make a meaningful difference.
It’s hard to imagine hominins surviving those ancient Norfolk winters without fire or warm clothing. Yet the fact the hominins were so far north means they must have found a way to survive the cold, so who knows what archaeologists will find in the future.
One thing is sure; these two don’t know. They are taxing their brains; “it’s hard to image” even for evolutionists whose job depends on virtuosity in imagining things. According to Darwinism, the “hominins” (a term embedding evolutionary assumptions in the very word) should have evolved thick fur and burrowing paws, or wings to fly south, instead of shivering for 850,000 years. Presumably they couldn’t think of a way to weave clothes yet. Adam and Eve experimented with fig leaves in a single day.
Are you better off for reading the fact-free speculations of evolutionists? What did you learn scientifically that you didn’t know five minutes ago? Not much, if anything.
Measurement tool creates new possibilities for understanding human evolution (University of Western Ontario, 9 Jan 2023). Look at the big photo of Darwinian storyteller Jay Stock. Doesn’t he have the features of a great truck driver? Wouldn’t that give him a more satisfying, productive career over speculating about how evolutionary theory might some day over the rainbow realize the “possibilities for understanding human evolution“?
His team studied muscles and brains of apes and men, but those are both creatures alive today. That knowledge could be useful to understand current anatomy and physiology, but neither Stock nor fellow Darwinist Jaap Saers witnessed any evolution (the subject of the article) without assuming it happened first (Begging the Question). Everything about “understanding” human evolution is cast in future tense: it’s futureware:
New research shows that brain development in humans and other primates is closely linked to skeletal development, a finding that creates new avenues for studying the evolution and development of the human brain…
“The close connections between brain development, locomotion, and bone development offer some exciting new ways to understand the evolution of some key human characteristics,” said Saers….
“This opens up completely new possibilities for studying the evolutionary history of our species,” said Saers.
The public is tired of waiting for the promised understanding. Bring some tangible goods by truck, please.
How the last 12,000 years have shaped what humans are today (Ohio State University, 16 Jan 2023). Press room reporter Jeffrey Grabmeier pays OSU evolutionists an undeserved complement as “researchers” instead of storytellers: “Researchers examined trends in evolution, adaptation.”
While humans have been evolving for millions of years, the past 12,000 years have been among the most dynamic and impactful for the way we live today, according to an anthropologist who organized a special journal feature on the topic.
Well, aren’t you blessed by this “knowledge” falsely so called. To swallow this story, you have to believe that millions of years passed as humans evolved their way from apedom, becoming upright-walking, tool-using, long-distance navigators mastering controlled use of fire and even sailing across open seas. Then, in the evolutionary blink of an eye, they invented farming! Wow. The first farmer must have wondered why his great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents never thought of that.
Chief storyteller Clark Larsen shamelessly displays his ignorance:
“When you look at the 6 or so million years of human evolution, this transition from foraging to farming and all the impact it has had on us – it all happened in just a blink of an eye,” Larsen said.
“In the scale of a human lifespan it may seem like a long time, but it really is not.”
It happened. What happened? Some random mutation in a hominin brain got selected by the environment, leading a caveman to realize that farming might be a great idea? Yeah; Darwinism means Stuff Happens.
Dr Larsen, please get a Class 2 license and help solve the supply chain crisis. Your current gig as a stand-up comedian is not contributing to society. We want you to have a more sublime purpose in life.
If you want to remain in research, and if you really want to understand things, word has it there are cutting-edge new jobs opening up in the Biological Engineering Department.
Plan ahead. Get out of evolutionary studies now before Humpty Darwin falls.