I recently posted a commentary titled "Darwin's Illusion".
Since I spoke more or less extemperaneously my comments reflected my sentiments rather than having the aspiration to be scientifically accurate in every way.
However, considering the small flood of "evidence" against my deliberations it seems I have to recant in shame and dishonor.
Thanks for the many comments that made clear to me that not being a biologist or a scientist of any description, and questioning the infallible opinions of scientists is a serious lack of diffidence.
Thus I apologise for having the audacity to doubt, even question, the holy grail of evolution and its prophet without having the necessary education and accreditation.
Additionally, I realise now how impious of me not to be content with the undeniable truth -as many replies pointed out- consisting of at least 30.000 to 6 millions textual proof for evolution.
I see now, how lacking the necessary humility compeled me to ask for an example of evidence, and understand clearly why no one was willing to offer such evidence, since I obviously would not have understood it, but also I should have realised the need to unquestionably follow the majority in the face of such grandiose and uncontestable truths.
Wait!
there was one commentator that obviously took pity with my dismal ignorance.
He boldly (boldly because he stand alone in this endeavor) offered a solid source of evidence concerning the discoverie of Archaeopteryx, a transition from dinosaurs to birds. The akward fact that this example was made redundant by a group of critiks who declared it a fraud is compensated by the fact that another more enlightend group contested this judgement.
Comments such as ...
"It astonishes me how anyone not living under a rock can be unaware of such a well supported, obvious, easily tested mechanism".
"Creationists, that have no clue when it comes to the sciences, do not count. You are listening to liars and idiots".
"Scientists have provided more than enough evidence for evolution".
"I think we have shown your ignorance about the matter and irrationality in discussing it that there is no chance your ideas will be taken serious by anyone".
"all papers support the core ideas, and thus confirm it, and no data contradicts it".
You have to prove that evolution is wrong, evolution is true, so it doesn't have to prove anything (my interpretation of this last comments).
...have really made me see the light.
(my apologies for not including more similar and encouraging comments)
I understand now that I lacked reasoning power by proudly assuming that the onus of proof laid with scientist when in reality I was the one having to prove that evolution did not take place.
In the face of such an avalanche of "belief there is proof" and emotion for the support of evolution as for Darwin elegant launch to deconstruct the belief in a creator, I see no alternative but to bend to the wisdom of the multitude.
The masses might have been wrong during the flood, but it's just a myth, in real life the majority is always right, right?
Your many comments made me appreciate the need to revaluate my allegiance and switch to unquestionably follow the teachings of scientists since they are so much smarter and educated than me. Judging by your comments dare I say even yourselves ?
The question I pose myself now is, should I follow science as a substitute for religion ?
Should I leave the narrow road I've been indoctrinated to walk on or rather follow the broad road with the rest of mainstream humanity?
Or alternatively, should I wait until evolution becomes actually a real science rather ...
than (as one -pro evolution- comment puts it)
"an imaginative theory that many choose to accept at face value regardless of evidence against it" ?
Difficult question indeed.
