TeleMad Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 As a creationist might want you to do, ignore all of the ellipses: ”There’s no easy way to admit this. For years, helpful letter writers … said we should be more balanced in our presentation of such issues as creationism … We resisted their advice … but spring is in the air, and all of nature is turning over a new leaf, so there’s no better time to say: you were right, and we were wrong. In retrospect, this magazine’s coverage of so-called evolution has been hideously one-sided. For decades, we published articles in every issue that endorsed the ideas of Charles Darwin’ and his cronies. … Where were the answering articles presenting the powerful case for scientific creationism? … Moreover, we shamefully mistreated the Intelligent Design (ID) theorists … Get ready for the new Scientific American.”(The Editors, Scientific American, April 2005, p10) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 ACK.lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted March 26, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 ACK.lame. What's lame? PS: It's kind of a puzzle. What I quoted is absolutely in there, but there's more to it than meets the eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 eh, it was my blunt way of saying i think ID (after reading a few threads and arguments here as well as other sources that i got through hypography) is absurd.wonderful that they aren't focusing ONLY on darwin evolution and broadening their horizons, but buying into creationism in a science magazine is.....contradicting their entire business? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 Scientific American!Now MORE American! We're politically correct! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted March 27, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 eh, it was my blunt way of saying i think ID (after reading a few threads and arguments here as well as other sources that i got through hypography) is absurd.wonderful that they aren't focusing ONLY on darwin evolution and broadening their horizons, but buying into creationism in a science magazine is.....contradicting their entire business? Clue: Look at what issue it was in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 "the editors" ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted March 27, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 "the editors" ! Those rascally editors played an April Fool's joke on their readers! They end the discussion saying "And it starts on April Fool's Day." I thought it was neat they the editors had that kind of sense of humor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 AHHHH!!! I have NEVER been good with puzzles like that! very good telemad, sorry i'm a bit of a joke-killer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.