Intelligent Design....?

[iceaura]

How do you id a 'transition fossil'?

All fossils are transition fossils, in the right context.

The only reason to point out the property in a given fossil is to answer silly questions from ID enthusiasts, who demand "transition" fossils in between descendent categories of beings (and then "transition" fossils between any two one finds, and so forth).

 

[Zeno]

This is the way science works.

1. Develop a theory.
2. Look for evidence which supports that theory.
3. If evidence doesn't support theory, continue to believe in theory anyway.
4. Use some kind of convoluted logic to make it appear that evidence supports theory.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11611-chimps-more-evolved-than-humans.html

 

[EndLightEnd]

This is the way religion works.

1. Get an idea.
2. Ignore contradicting evidence.
3. Keep idea forever.
4. End

 

[iceaura]

This is the way science works.

1. Develop a theory.
2. Look for evidence which supports that theory.
3. If evidence doesn't support theory, continue to believe in theory anyway.
4. Use some kind of convoluted logic to make it appear that evidence supports theory.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...an-humans.html

Odd that you would post a link apparently contradicting your post. ?

btw: the evidence for Darwinian evolution predated the theory by quite a bit - and that was true of most major theoretical advances. New theories don't jsut show up for no reason - they are attempts to handle piles of unexplained evidence that is making trouble for the resident theory. There's a step 5, in other words: acknowledge that all convolutions have failed, and that new theory works better. That's what happened to creationism - which was, after all, a major scientific theory of its time, and was only rejected because it didn't work.