Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

We are the Borg.
User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 68400
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 2511 times
Been thanked: 995 times

Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Abdul Alhazred » Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:02 pm

Darwin Was Sexist, and So Are Many Modern Scientists
Scientific American

Analysis: First they came for Art, but I said nothing because I was not an artist, etc.
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
sparks
Posts: 13004
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!
Has thanked: 1507 times
Been thanked: 483 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby sparks » Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:02 pm

Darwin was also a Gawd-botherer.

Nobody's perfect.
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 68400
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 2511 times
Been thanked: 995 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Abdul Alhazred » Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:17 pm

I remember when SA was really a science magazine. :oldman:
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
Mentat
Posts: 10247
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:00 pm
Location: Hangar 18
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 123 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Mentat » Thu Dec 21, 2017 7:24 pm

Well, you're looking at their blog, not their actual magazine.
It's "pea-can", man.

Lapis Sells . . . But Who's Buying?

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 32367
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1443 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Grammatron » Thu Dec 21, 2017 8:28 pm

Mentat wrote:Well, you're looking at their blog, not their actual magazine.


Still has their name on it.
pillory wrote:jokes aren't funny....seriously thinking......

seriously thinking might be funny....but it's not joke

User avatar
Mentat
Posts: 10247
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:00 pm
Location: Hangar 18
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 123 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Mentat » Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:28 pm

Grammatron wrote:
Mentat wrote:Well, you're looking at their blog, not their actual magazine.


Still has their name on it.


So?
It's "pea-can", man.

Lapis Sells . . . But Who's Buying?

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 32367
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1443 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Grammatron » Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:31 pm

Mentat wrote:
Grammatron wrote:
Mentat wrote:Well, you're looking at their blog, not their actual magazine.


Still has their name on it.


So?


So it's Scientific American
pillory wrote:jokes aren't funny....seriously thinking......

seriously thinking might be funny....but it's not joke

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 19606
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Hiding under ed's bed
Has thanked: 545 times
Been thanked: 558 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Rob Lister » Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:36 pm

First issue and mission statement. top of page 2, col 1

https://ia800604.us.archive.org/8/items ... -08-28.pdf

They've held to that reasonable will. Except the Christian part.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 68400
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 2511 times
Been thanked: 995 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Abdul Alhazred » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:04 pm

Mentat wrote:Well, you're looking at their blog, not their actual magazine.


A distinction without a difference.

Who does the author work for?
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
sparks
Posts: 13004
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!
Has thanked: 1507 times
Been thanked: 483 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby sparks » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:49 am

Himself I'm betting....
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.

User avatar
Mentat
Posts: 10247
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:00 pm
Location: Hangar 18
Has thanked: 36 times
Been thanked: 123 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Mentat » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:57 am

He works as a director/author for a private research university. It's literally at the bottom of the page.

If that's the official stance of SA because they publish guest bloggers, then white supremacy is the official stance of the libertarian fuckwits who post white supremacy propaganda. Oh wait, we can't say that. So what's it going to be?
It's "pea-can", man.

Lapis Sells . . . But Who's Buying?

User avatar
Anaxagoras
Posts: 20359
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan
Has thanked: 1254 times
Been thanked: 1034 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Anaxagoras » Fri Dec 22, 2017 3:33 am

http://meaningoflife.tv/videos/39482?in=4:48

Horgan has long been affiliated with SA in some capacity or another.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

User avatar
Witness
Posts: 14072
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:50 pm
Has thanked: 1617 times
Been thanked: 2171 times

Re: Darwin debunked in Scientific American!

Postby Witness » Fri Dec 22, 2017 3:38 am

Abdul Alhazred wrote:I remember when SA was really a science magazine. :oldman:

Me too. Started reading it end of the sixties, gave up when it became a glossy like so many others, privileging flashy CGI over content. :oldman:


Return to “Science, Mathematics & Technology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot] and 0 guests