I know that, but what does he mean by garbage? Does he mean it's poorly constructed? Poorly explained? Completely incorrect? Over-simplified?
The theory by Darwin is as it says—A theory. Darwin was very scientifically fair in his observations. He was well aware that his observations were conceptions and ideas without any concrete factual grounding, and he refused to accept them as fact.
What is ludicrous is those who accept it as fact and its methods of conception and use it as an acceptable springboard for new ideas that are, in turn, to be taken seriously as scientific fact.
It's important to note that science is also an abstract field and not a body of people. Scientists are people that act as philosophers under the field of science, and they may, individually, have motives not in favour of the scientific mindset or method, but science itself remains only with its own inhibitions. There is no modern, classical, or Renaissance science, there is just science; the discoveries, minds, and developments associated with it are all circumstantial. The same can be said for religion and ethics, which are separate philosophical areas that seek to answer fundamentally different kinds of questions. Just as science cannot be blamed for the ignorance of a single professor, a faith cannot be blamed for the ignorance of a priest, rather, we acknowledge that these people fail to quite hit the mark in their personal endeavours in relation to the field they profess to contribute or derive from.
That is a good point. Though what I was tackling, in part, was that the idea of science being incorruptible is false.
There's a big difference between an unpopular opinion and just being plain wrong.
Here's an opinion for you: people shouldn't try to debate things that they haven't bothered to do research on first
I did my research. Which is precisely why I can say that evolutionary theory (in the way that it is acceptable grounds for further advancement) is unacceptable. For instance: As a scientist, to use the method of radiocarbon dating to assume the date of a fossil is foolish. Humanity is foolish to claim to know what happens in millions of years, when our recorded history is but a speck in comparison. Maybe if we were an intelligent race that kept records for millions of years, we would have a fair experience to judge such spans of time.
As of now our perspective is inadequate, and evolutionary theory dons the title of fact, but is only mere speculation.
