We can say those people used their influence improperly. It happens all the time. Using your influence to get people to accept your ideas happens in all walks of life. Hence the Salem Witch trials and the requirement to believe in God in order to hold office in Maryland.
Who's "we"?
More importantly, what's the result? That's what one hopes to discover by investigating history.
Probably true, I forgot how much influence the "evil empire of evolutionism" has over the media. That's probably why the porn industry can still function in this country because of the influential evolutionists trying to inject evil everywhere they can. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the first amendment.
I had not considered this angle. Is there evidence of a connection?
Why do I care what these folks in the X-club did. You seem to think their influence extends to now even though the club ended before 1900. So, what do you have that shows their continued influence? Perhaps their spirits are haunting the scientists today and causing them to continue to subscribe to a theory with no evidence in its favor?
I don't know why you care - you tell me.
Judging by the number of books still being written about them and the ideas they promoted, I'd say quite a few people are being influenced by them now. Evospeak is still widely used - that's more evidence. Intimidation is still practiced in support of their views. I could probably think of more, and I'd probably overlook a few things.
I haven't seen Wilbur or Orville around lately. Do you maintain their influence is missing from the present day? Are their ghosts involved? And I'm told Nietsche is dead also, for what that's worth.
Seriously, your comment on the merits (or lack thereof) of evolutionism (whatever that is!!!) seems to indicate that you believe there is no evidence for evolution (surprise!, surprise!). It is unfortunate that your stating such does not make it so. Perhaps you should provide some evidence that your statement is correct.
There is a thread listing and categorizing the evidence. You've seen it.
Of course this same scientific method that cannot ferret out the (to you) glaring inadequacies of evidential support for evolution, seems to provide mountains of modern conveniences for you to take advantage of....Medicine, computers, aircraft, space flight...to name a few. What is it that allows scientists to be so intelligent in those areas of science yet makes them so stupid when it comes to biology, geology and cosmology?
On the contrary. I have maintained that proper application of the scientific method
will ferret out mistakes. I'm close to concluding that's why you're afraid to apply it.
Your second question is poorly worded. If I were compelled to answer that one, all the evidence points to evolutionism. But they aren't stupid. They're deceived. Some may be only playing along. It's hard to tell. We are attempting to investigate how the deception took place. Why do you oppose this investigation?
Now that I think about it, there's a pattern: the more someone becomes involved in evolutionism, the less they seem capable of applying the rules of science. They contradict themselves more frequently, and their words make sense less frequently. Maybe there is some stupification involved at some point after all. 'Nother topic.
