Is atheism predicated partially on the belief in evolution and the current prevailing views of science.
If so, then such a belief is subject to drastic changes as discoveries and theories
have recently arose that shatter the paradigm that is the foundation of such a belief:
Discoveries keep pushing back the inception of civilization, indefinitely back in time
Evidence of coastal civilizations existing during the ice age are arising in now inundated coastal region due to rising seas.
The concept of a missing link is no longer postulated as a bush of hominids lineages walked the earth. With what was once considered ancestors, actually being contemporary with postulated descendants. A bush of hominids actually existed as recently as 30,0000 B.C.E.
Though theories of evolution abound no working scientific model exists for the emergence of life.
Our very existence is interwoven with the anthropic principle. As such this has required scientist to postulate the multiverse to explain how the anthropic principle is mindlessly satisfied by nature. However this just substitutes one unfalsifiable believe for another.
In truth, Darwin's world has been shattered and the truth has become intractable. Even as we cope with dark matter and energy. Terms that falsely connote that we have defined them, when in fact they are no more apparent than God. As such new scientific theories continue to emerge based on the inadequacy of the standard model. This will continue into infinitum since, as God there is no means to detect these alleged entities with scientific instrumentation.
But you DID know about Jimmy Hoffa? That kid who didn't know John Wayne probably didn't know who Jimmy Hoffa was, either, but probably did know who John Wayne Gacy was because serial killers is something little boys are interested in.
Anyway, I remember my parents talking about Judge Crater's disappearance. Funny the things one remembers from one's childhood.
Strangely enough, I first heard the name as the punch line of a joke on the old "Dick Van Dyke" show, didn't get the joke, and looked him up (still didn't get the joke).
RE: "fear of the Inquisition"
It IS true that the compliment of having a "nice rack" took on a whole different meaning during those days. "Too short for your suit? We've got an app for that!" - fun times --
Cute Anime nonetheless.
@Michael the lunatic
So what then did the cosmo article have to do with your claims about the Kow Swamp people - since it didn't mention them? So what if another group of hominids went extinct - we know that many did. How is this even intriguing in terms of evolution? Where is the big conspiracy that you are claiming?
Heather, Ok, I will give some slack since you are not a scientist. If you read the thread above, I'm stating that basically Kow Swamp people break the paradigm that Homo Habilis existed only a million years ago and are the extinct ancestors of Homo -Sapiens
I need not be a scientist to read the Cosmos article you cited and see that it does not mention the Kow Swamp people. I need not be a scientist to google Kow Swamp people and find thousands of pages referencing the site - contrary to your claim that scientists are trying to sweep the find 'under the carpet'. I need not be a scientist to see that updating the model of human evolution to account for new data is getting us no closer to your ancient tribal deity.
Now, what was it about the Kow Swamp people that you felt offered substantiation for the practice of pleasing a tribal god by burning animal carcasses?
Heather I am not reposting. I have already posted an article showing that Kow Swamp people clearly have Homo-Habilis traits. To date the scientific community has not seriously considered Kow Swamp people beyond the inadequate write-off one scientist. Kow Swamp people break the paradigm. No one will get his PhD adequately considering these fossils. To date there are no plans to give Kow Swamp people their day in the Academic community. You do not have to be a scientist to know this either. Try to google how many papers address the Habilis attributes of the Kow Swamp people and you will arrive at a dearth of material.
You don't need to be a scientist to read all the articles stating that further research of the Kow Swamp remains is prohibited by treaty with the First Nations people of Australia. So the fact that no one will get their PhD by desecrating protected remains is no surprise, dimwit.
Casts of the fossils are still in the public domain. DNA sampling is of course out reach. But remember this also happen in the States with Kennewick man, which also broke an established paradigm:
Recently, a coalition of native tribes lost their claim to the remains of Kennewick Man, a 9,000-year-old skeleton found in Washington State. The case was won by a group of scientists who wanted access to the remains for study. Like Penon Woman, Kennewick Man is doliocephallic. George Gill, a forensic anthropologist at the University of Wyoming and one of the plaintiffs in the Kennewick Man case, said evidence indicated that seafaring people from southeast Asia or Polynesia could have reached the Americas by traveling along the Pacific Rim, landing somewhere in what is now South America. Gill also said an ancient European people could also have reached the northeast corner of North America. So, as in the States, the case can be reopened.
Michael - one of the recursive symptoms of magical thinking is jumping from topic to topic each time the facts don't pan out. You keep the rush going by just leaping over every obstacle to make new connections. If you had something to say about the Kow People, then say it - otherwise admit you have no basis for objection with the research that has been done.
Before you move on to another study, either break free of the old one by admitting you were totally off base or specify the objection you had with it and stay on topic. You claim to have a high IQ, a great deal of education, and a professional career - so I can only assume that you use a pseudonym here to avoid having colleagues find out just what kind of mumbo jumbo you waste your time peddling.