Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 21:35:58 +0000, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by b.schafer@ed.ac.uk (Burkhard):

Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 13:17:54 +0000
Ernest Major <{$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>

On 27/03/2024 00:33, Burkhard quoted:
 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler

 
How good or bad is that Wikipedia article? (It's not a subject I would
trust Wikipedia on, as it's vulnerable to communities with axes to grind.)
 

>

Does it matter?
As a non-scientist whatever Hitler's views on evolution were are
unimportant.

>
For the validity of the theory of evolution? Not at all. But
I think history deserves to be treated as a serious academic
endeavour too, and I just hate the fake histories that get
repeated at nauseam.
>

Fake histories, at least from the perspective of what
actually happened and the *reasons* it happened, are the
norm throughout history.

>

--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
 the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov