Jon Huntsman Jr., a former Utah governor and ambassador to China, isn’t a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination. And that’s too bad, because Mr. Hunstman has been willing to say the unsayable about the G.O.P. — namely, that it is becoming the “anti-science party.” This is an enormously important development. And it should terrify us. Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, recently made headlines by dismissing evolution as “just a theory,” one that has “got some gaps in it” — an observation that will come as news to the vast majority of biologists. But what really got peoples’ attention was what he said about climate change: “I think there are a substantial number of scientists who have manipulated data so that they will have dollars rolling into their projects. And I think we are seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change.” That’s a remarkable statement — or maybe the right adjective is “vile.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/opinion/republicans-against-science.html
Until we see the actual first organism that started evolution then it is a theory. You won't believe in God unless you see him, likewise I won't believe in evolution unless I see "Organism #1".
I'd say a theory that can't explain how life formed where there was no life has a pretty big frickin' hole in it.
Here's some more science for Mr. Huntsman--who I believe supported cap n tax. I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post 88+ years ago_
I don't have a problem with the "spark of life" concept creating basic protein building blocks. But the tracing of descendency is NOT "settled science" as previous posters have noted. Go to the Science forum http://www.usmessageboard.com/4056732-post78.html and look at the "tree of life" link that I was given to PROVE we know how we ascended from slime mold. We can't even trace the lineage. Which would be a neccessary scientific pre-requistite for proving that Darwinian theory and ONLY Darwinian was the prime mover behind all that Genetic engineering.. Why not cosmic rays? Or foreign DNA from meteorites? Science my ass.. It's lack of humility and too much hubrous on the part of secular humanists who THINK that they understand the details of Greenhouse theory or the ascent from slime..
Sentience-out-of-protoplasm evolution is, by its very definition, still just a theory...That is a semantic fact. Now, I believe that you were saying something about someone who doesn't know jack shit about the topic they are discussing?
