Professor Steven L. Goldman in his course, “Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It”, addresses intelligent design as a scientific hypothesis, on the face of it he says is more compelling than creationism. Notice he knows the difference between the two, but rejects the supernatural agent or agents which the modern intelligent design movement avoids giving any explanation. Observations of nature for thousands of years to the modern era appears designed because that’s in fact what it is, designed. The objective of evolutionary ‘theory’ is integrate it as the explanatory factor for everything.
So what do evolutionary scientists do to meet the objective? They call the observation of nature appearing designed as an “illusion.” And that is not all, there are many surprising or counter-intuitive observations which require integration into the theory! The most common answer used to explain such falsifications is circular reasoning which goes like this, they evolved because they evolved.
Removing tonsils came from the ‘theory’ of evolution because it was considered useless vestiges from the past. The appendix is another one. As a result, medicine recommended parents have their children tonsils removed and a lot of parents did just that but nowadays its mainly infection that prompts removal. A recent study suggests this evolutionary assumption about tonsils being useless does more harm than good and like junk dna where important functions was discovered, there are also an important function for them being there because it has been discovered there is a connection with heart disease. Although the article did not mention the old vestigial organs argument.
Medical Xpress reports…
“Both the appendix and tonsils are lymphoid organs and thus components of the body’s immune system, albeit of modest importance. The recurrence of tonsillitis and appendicitis – caused by infection – are the usual reasons for removal. Behind the study lay evidence that removal was associated with moderate long-term effects on the immune system and alterations in risk for some autoimmune disorders. Studies suggest that between 10 and 20% of all young people have tonsils or appendix removed.”
MacGregor Campbell writer in New Scientist in a cartoon video, claims a new theory reveals the reason why we are human and language ‘evolved’ was because humans like caring for animals…
“What is it exactly that makes us human? According to a new theory, it could be our unique ability to connect with and care for animals. Our connection to animals may have been so transformative that it led us to develop skills like language and domestication that ultimately enabled our planet-wide success.”
It has been discovered that some fossil human teeth of males contain more metal than those of females. New Scientist really comes up with a winner here as reporter Ferris Jabr eats up everything that Sandi Copeland of the Max Planck Institute without questioning one single thing, Conclusion: “Early hominin women had wanderlust.”
When one hears about condition of autism, it is generally considered a serious problem for those afflicted and their families, however, not for some evolutionary psychologists which find blessings in the condition.
Science Daily reports…
“The autism spectrum may represent not disease, but an ancient way of life for a minority of ancestral humans, said Jared Reser, a brain science researcher and doctoral candidate in the USC Psychology Department. Some of the genes that contribute to autism may have been selected and maintained because they created beneficial behaviors in a solitary environment, amounting to an autism advantage, Reser said.”
“The “autism advantage,” a relatively new perspective, contends that sometimes autism has compensating benefits, including increased abilities for spatial intelligence, concentration and memory. Although individuals with autism have trouble with social cognition, their other cognitive abilities are sometimes largely intact.”
It was not stated whether Jared Reser surveyed modern hunters for their opinions, or even if so, whether a deduction would be possible about unobservable ancestors! In any case, there is a lot to learn from these imaginative so-so stories that package themselves with all this false dichotomy, glittering generalities and loaded words, which one can only conclude, it’s not scientific!