Astronomy used to be the flagship model of observational science. Now, the method is: embrace the dogma, then hunt for obscure details that might support it.
Any science needs open debate, but Darwinism is different: Big Science forbids it. Here are examples of ridiculous speculations that result. An Ancient Virus May Be Responsible for Human Consciousness (Rafi Letzter at Live Science). Your rationality is a mistake. Your ancient ancestor caught a virus, and woke up, transforming from zombie to person. This […]
Every once in awhile, biologists argue over whether evolution is predictable. The latest flap over stick insects sticks up for predictability, but flops.
The Darwin Fish scientific method: Draw a fish. Draw legs on it to mock Christians who use it as a symbol. Then furiously hunt for evidence that a fish with feet existed.
With dispassionate nonchalance, Darwinists continue to describe us as glorified apes, and justify every vice. The consequences are not only disastrous, but illogical.
We examine numerous articles and papers that talk about evolution to see if neo-Darwinism (or even old Darwinism) actually contributes to the understanding of nature.
OOL is short for Origin of Life. There's only one theory that works. The rest are so improbable, their supporters go to ridiculous lengths to believe them.