Hic Hic Hooray: Hiccups Explained

Anonymous Hero writes "Finally after millions of years (and zillions of hiccups) New Scientist gives us an explanation for this most annoying and least obvious of adaptations!"

Comments

Re: Millons?

[Black Parrot]

> There are many slashdotters who believe this and can argue quite coherently against evolutionists.

If that's the case, why do we always hear the same old schlock instead of those coherent arguments?

> Use logic, reason, arguments.

Add "evidence" to that recipe and you'll understand why most of us reject mythomagical explanations of how the universe works.

> Creationists understand and agree with natural selection.

Actually, some do, some don't. Some, usually called "theistic evolutionists", don't even deny evolution.

> I do not think this attitude of "evolution is right" should be encouraged on slashdot.

Let's instead encourage looking at the facts, and we'll get the same result.

> All I'm asking is that we change this culture and start to respect opinions of each other.

Even when those opinions are demonstrably idiotic?

Re:Millons?

[Scarblac]

I feel compelled to reply to this troll. Why do you have to make comments like this? There are many slashdotters who believe this and can argue quite coherently against evolutionists. I personally have not yet met a single evolutionist who _understands_ the creationist position. Especially on slashdot.

Indeed, I do not. I have never seen any evidence for Creationism. I just cannot take it seriously at all. Remember, shooting holes in "Evolution Theory" is not evidence for Creationism. It's not an either/or question, not a zero sum game. Just that some parts of evolution aren't yet understood well doesn't mean there is any evidence for Creationism.