Random Comic


└ Tags:

Discussion (5)¬

  1. Poor Richard says:

    “Offoflogy recapitulates foolology,” as Poor Dick says.

  2. Hobbes says:

    Clever, PR. You took that course, too.

  3. Daniel says:

    God is on my offoflogy.

    True in both senses.

  4. JohnnieCanuck says:

    Did you get the version of the course that showed how Ernst Haeckel’s theory that “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny” was flawed and that the famous drawings are not accurate? There may still be textbooks with those drawings being used in classes.

    This has been a favorite of creationists looking for a defence from the Theory of Evolution. They find no shame in attacking a discredited 140 year old idea as if it were still considered valid. Perhaps it’s their own adherence to ancient texts that makes it seem worth attacking.

    Curious that Haeckel’s problem was that he thought up the theory and then adjusted his results to conform to it. This is what we see creationists doing all the time and here they are faulting someone known to have gotten it wrong while using their methodology.

  5. Hobbes says:

    Yes, JohnnieCanuck, I did take that version. Same thing concerning Piltdown Man. It is science that discovers frauds within its ranks.

    That is the very reason science can be trusted. Fundamentalists always miss that point. Religion doesn’t appreciate critical review. If it did, it would self destruct.

    –The unexamined belief is not worth believing–


NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.