I ponder and query often.  For those of you not in the know, my degree is in Philosophy.  Obviously, I am not using my education to my best abilities by working at RadioShack.  When that big philosophy firm opens in Des Moines, I’m ready.
    One of the things I wonder about is humanity’s lack of consistency.  I beg you to allow me to pick on evolution.  Darwin is completely ignored, today.  Science, we are told, supports macro-eveloution; i.e.,all life coming from one source, billions of years ago.  I don’t believe it but that is in part 2.
    Darwin notices that the same kind of birds may adapt diferently depending on their environment.  He looked a great deal at beaks.  The beak of on bird may have adapted to allow the bird to get bugs from the inner parts of deep flowers; while another bird, identical in everyother way, may have a beak that allows it so crunch harder exoskeletons.  Darwin then surmised that if one bird’s food source vanished, the bird would die and so too its offspring.
    The theory is that only the strongest of a species, the one with the best adaptation, will survive.  This is what I was taught in school and what I here in the news and media today.  I (a creationist) do not discount this.  This really is the way it appears to work.  It is called micro-evolution and it works.
    I am not actually debating the evolution, creation chestnut here and now.  I am calling for consistency.  If you believe in evolution, I can assume that you are not actualy a raving lunatic that wants to eat my baby.  Likewise, I’m sure, you can respect my beliefs and, though I may be crazy, still sit with me at the end of the bar and discuss the six nations tournament.
    The kind of consistancy I am calling for is consistancy of thought.  If you believe that Darwin was right and the weakest of a kind of thing will die, then let them do it.  I will pick on polar bears.  Polar bear numbers seem to be down because they are scattered and their food so far away.  The ice shelf melted dramatically last summer (though it did reform to nearly its normal size this winter) and that means polar bears had to swim farther with out food just to look for food.  So..., evolve already.
    It is my estimation that Darwin loving scientists are not allowing Darwin’s hoodoo to do its thing.  These scientists are calling for drastic actions to curtail greenhouse gases in order to keep global warming from getting worse.  (I think glabal warming is a good thing, that’s another blog.)  What they ought to be doing is raising awareness to the facts of evolution.  Science is SUPPOSED to be impartial.  It is SUPPOSED to observe.  And, it is SUPPOSED to be varifyable.
    What we have is science co-opted by animists who want to save the polar bear because it has a spirit; because it is my brother.  The philosophy we are seeing in the sciences is cosmic-humanism.  To see this philosophy played out, go watch the Mouse.  Pocohantas is the best example of this philosophy I’ve seen in a long time. 
    Darwin’s theory gives no quarter for the spirit of a thing.  If a thing is unfit, it will cease to exist (it may continue to actually exist  as a nutritional deposit, thus giving strength to the stronger thing).  I do not know if Darwin was an atheistic secular-humanist (my suspician) or a devout cathilic; but, I know he contented himself in the knowledge that a weaker thing may die so a stronger thing would exist (thus denying the well established scientific law of entropy [look it up in your physics books under laws of thermodynamics]).
    If you are an evolutionist, do not follow your heart rather follow your head.  I am not calling for action, I am calling for inaction. Observe the true scientific process and, well, observe.  It is not for you to meddle in afair that have been in motion for 4.5 billion yours.
     I will still drink a beer with you and share my conversation with you.  The whole world will thank you for not lying about who you are.  I promice to not lie about who I am in part 2.