Culture Darwinism Genetics News

Physicist defends consensus science

Spread the love

Should know better.

In an article defending consensus science, physicist Ethan Siegel opines,

Think about evolution, for example. Many people still rally against it, claiming that it’s impossible. Yet evolution was the consensus position that led to the discovery of genetics, and genetics itself was the consensus that allowed us to discover DNA, the “code” behind genetics, inherited traits and evolution.

Actually, modern genetics started with Gregor Mendel who was as oblivious to Darwin’s work as Darwin was to his.

The triumph of Darwinism has distorted genetics, such that horizontal gene transfer, epigenetics, and convergence were for many decades routinely underresearched. Scientists scrambled for evidence of the great wonders of accumulated information supposedly performed by Darwin’s natural selection acting on random mutation (Darwinism). That’s where the accolades and the prizes were.

Darwin’s great wonders are just not there. But that’s no deterrent to the pursuit, and won’t be, probably until well into the next century. Some stories are so good that they do not have to be fact-based. They can fly in the face of what is known about information and still can be propped up by rhetoric alone.

Indeed, if what you want is a good facts-optional story, the frenzied a-crock-alypses of consensus science, whether global winter or global warming to take just one example, are much more helpful than a range of findings-based interpretation.

Anyway, consensus science only becomes a big issue when there is something wrong with the science.

The world is full of physicists who do not actually know what the problems with Darwinian evolution (the only one they know anything about) actually are. And don’t want to know. It’s easier just to defend it without finding out.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Search Uncommon Descent for similar topics, under the Donate button.

6 Replies to “Physicist defends consensus science

  1. 1
    Barry Arrington says:

    “Yet evolution was the consensus position that led to the discovery of genetics”

    That any educated person (far less a scientist) would say this beggars belief.

  2. 2
    Joe says:

    Mendel was the father of genetics and was a Creationist. The discovery of DNA had nothing to do with evolution.

  3. 3
    bFast says:

    I think this is a good post to discuss one of my other hobby horses — cold fusion, also called LENR.

    Cold fusion has been banned, mocked and publicly shamed just like ID is. Cold fusion is described in wikipedia as “pathological science”. Currently the phenomenon is occurring in the laboratories of at least a dozen organizations, some of which are major.

    This is consensus science at its finest. You can explore it now if you wish. But when this technology breaks through just remember that it has been held back badly by the “consensus”.

  4. 4
    bornagain77 says:

    Scientific Consensus? You’ve Got to Be Kidding, Right? – May 4, 2015
    Excerpt: In 1999, Darwinist Bruce Alberts claimed that Darwinism is “at the core of genetics.” Yet Mendel had no need for Darwin’s hypothesis. How can Darwinism, which contributed nothing to the origin of genetics and resisted it for half a century, now be at its core? It is Darwinism that needs genetics, not genetics that needs Darwinism.

  5. 5
    Robert Byers says:

    As said HOW can a educated person think evolution consensus led to genetics to DNA discoveries??
    In reality discoveries are made by a few people in certain subjects without reading unrelated subjects.
    Evolutionary biology was not in the credits./
    This physicist makes the case. he doesn’t know anything about genetics or biology.!
    Probably taking a job from a better physicist !!

  6. 6
    Axel says:

    Wow! How do they get away with it?! Same way they get the poorest folk to vote against their own physical survival. Ubiquitous, perjurious media

Leave a Reply