a reply to: peter vlar
I used to use the analogy of computer programming languages to illustrate this very idea.
When I started in the 1970s I was programming Basic, and my computer interface was command lines on my Apple II (number 4000). Today I program in
pearl, and R, and my interface is a GUI (either Widows, a flavor of Linux, or Apple OS), my Phone went from rotary dial, to key pad, to a cell, to a
smart phone (iOS).
If I stayed thinking like the kid I was in the 1970s I would assume all programs were like basic (that would kill me in R, which is all open source
and regularly breaks the rules), and that to run my desktop I would type command lines.
The theory of evolution proves it self in some ways by having evolved. We discovered what DNA did, for as long as we could look down a microscope we
wondered what the hell those squiggly bits in the nucleus were doing. Sure some thought it might be how heredity was passed along . Watson and Crick,
solved that for us. But our understanding still evolves. People assumed once we mapped the Human Genome we had the keys to life. Wrong, epigenetics
was discovered. I've personally worked with human genetics, and understand how much we do not know. I've constructed pretty phylogenetic diagrams to
show relatedness between species. Knowing full well that will change the next genome sequenced. Its science, I evolve my ideas with the evidence.
Hell when I worked in the Pharmaceutical industry as a Process Improvement Scientist, it was my job to do itterative improvements. Its how I got my
name on some patents, and how some of those are no longer worth the paper they were written on, I blew them out of the water with more work.
People here (and in churches) call Science a Religion. Which amuses me, if so, its the most honest one out there, it changes with evidence. There are
no dietary taboos (well beyond "don't eat your own kind, which is common sense if you study certain diseases including CJD), there are no "its
dirty if you sleep with XYZ in your own species". Nope, morality is based upon what is best for the species, and common decency. Not "God spake
thus". If I was to inject my own spiritual imperatives into my science, well lets say it would be strange as hell.