One personnel of an un-named belief system argued that Paleontology cannot be sure. Fossils are imperfect and not all animals are preserved. So he implied that fossils are not reliable to use its information for the formulation of scientific theories. Thus he continued to imply that these mentioned scientific theories are severely undermined. Then he said that he prefers to choose scriptures (rather than fossils or rocks) which are written with the all-knowing wisdom of the divine as his ultimate source of information. Now what he really missed is that Paleontology or any other scientific field rely most on the evidence. At least rocks cannot speak. Yes. They cant tell the truth, and of course more importantly they cant also tell or convince us with lies or wrongs!!! (if you feel offended you would choose the latter word) We make our interpretations on the rocks and fossils. We do our best, and we admit that we arent sure about information we have on fossils, but is any other party surer than us anyway? For the investigation of observable and testable world, science is the best way to study. Because it never relied on gut feelings but on the very weight of evidence and the very rationality which our guts repulse every time. And the scientific community itself is rebellious, (and I agree that there is some consensus seeking authoritarian peer-review atmosphere.) But such authoritarian team-ups wont last long for scientific communitys very essence is too bold for authoritarianism to sustain in one place over a prolonged time period.
Posted on: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:12:13 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015