Usually when a magazine asks a rhetorical question on the cover, it doesn’t immediately answer it in 160-point type on the first page of the corresponding article.
Very nice, National Geographic.
Wow, could that blog you linked to have been any more insulting to Creationists? Thanks for being cool enough not to take the cheap shots, Snarkmarketeers!
Also, I’m not sure who’s worse — people who refuse to believe in evolution, or people who do believe in it and use it to support their nefarious political agendas. Scary how a good scientific theory can be used for such disgusting ends. Eugenics anyone? Not to mention less extreme but equally disgusting social biology assertions about the proper place of women and Blacks, just to name a few groups who get the shaft from applications of evolutionary theory.
Yeah, there’s been a lot of conflation of descriptive theory with prescriptive policy. Seriously… as if sociobiology could ever indicate “the proper place” of anyone.
I think some critics of sociobiology paint themselves into a corner with their insistence that we are all biologically equal, though. Because then if it turns out that we’re NOT — let’s say men are genetically stupider than women, for instance — the foundation for their policy is shot.
Better to base our equality on essential human-ness and not on any genetic characteristics at all.
I think Atticus Finch put it best when he said “in our courts all men are created equal.” Our equality is before the law–equal rights, equal protection, and the like. It has nothing to do with obviously variant items like intelligence or strength.
There are a lot more people using an advocacy against evolution to effectively support nefarious political agendas then there are people using evolution itself.
Evolution is an inescapable fact.
Creationism is Wrong. It explains nothing. It is not science, and it never will be. It fails the most basic test of science, that of testability and falsifiable hypotheses. Creationsim and Intelligent Design will stand out in history as the words of the supremely ignorant, who have peddled psuedo-scienftic muck to an audience incapable of understanding the depth of the subject matter. Just as I as a non-religious biologist cannot comment expertly on the purely religious (I simply do not have the breadth of knowledge and understanding required), those who are not scientifically trained cannot deride evolution…they do not have the knowledge or expertise to have a sound basis for doing so. ‘Wisest is he who knows he knows nothing…’ Stick to the pulpit, and stop holding back the true history of Us.
Below, you can use basic HTML tags and/or Markdown syntax.
Composing a reply. Cancel?
Founded in 2003, Snarkmarket is a long-running conversation about media, journalism, technology, cities, design, books, music, movies, the future, and the past.
The title, it should be said, is a misnomer. You’ll see.
Follow along: @Snarkmarket on Twitter / Snarkmarket RSS
A leaky rocketship
/ Bless the toolmakers
/ The art of working in public
/ The cave, the corps, the league
/ The two mayors
/ Age of majority
/ A hypothetical path to the speakularity
/ Kanye west, media cyborg
/ Only crash
/ Stock and flow
All-time best comment threads:
Explosions in the sky
The deep snarkives: 2016 (4)