Human evolution: The spin machine in top gear

For a fascinating misreading of what the recently announced Messel Pit fossil really shows, go here:

Scientists have found a 47-million-year-old human ancestor. Discovered in Messel Pit, Germany, the fossil, described as Darwinius masillae, is 20 times older than most fossils that explain human evolution.

That fossil doesn't "explain" human evolution; it complicates the picture. The theory that was gaining ground was that humans were descended from tarsier-like creatures, but this fossil, touted as a primate ancestor, is a lemur-like creature.

Often, I hear from people attempting to patch the cracks in the unguided Darwinian evolution theory, as follows: "We have more information than ever!"

Yes, but what if it is - as in this case - the evidence is contradictory?

Evidence for Theory A subtracts from evidence for Theory B. So if A is right, B must be subtracted from the total. If B is right, A must be subtracted from the total.

Surely, that is pretty obvious. But watching the spin machine in high gear is a fascinating exercise anyway.

No wonder fewer and fewer believe Darwinism.

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy:

Intellectual freedom in Canada: "human rights" commissions, spreading the oppression, may trigger their own well-deserved destruction

Civil rights lawyer Ezra Levant advises that

I'm pleased to report that Tim Hudak, considered a leading contender for the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, has announced that he would abolish that province's human rights tribunal. Hudak becomes the second PCPO candidate to make that pledge, the first being Randy Hillier, which I wrote about here.

I am waiting to see what the ruling provincial Liberals' response will be.

Will they support the oppression despite growing public awareness and unrest?

Or will they preempt the Conservatives by shutting down the censors, shakedown artists, and social engineers?

Ezra Levant's book, Shakedown, is in the top ten in Canada, and I strongly recommend it to anyone who lives in a free country and would like to keep it that way. Mark Steyn's Lights Out is another top pick, providing a key international overview.

I hope they tie for #1 spot.

I wrote to Ezra, re Hudak's announcement:

1. Here's why I think we can't win:

Government never gives up power willingly, and some people enjoy the role of bully - whether as a Nazi or as a "compassionate" HRC officer (who issues orders that wreck your life, career, and reputation for a completely insane reason).

My concern is that many freespeechers overestimate the value of protests, resolutions, and revelations of scandal, and underestimate the value of sheer, dogged determination, following a political strategy - for however long it takes - to rid our government of social engineers.

The social engineers are the heirs of the eugenics movement. It took the Holocaust to make them so unpopular that as soon as they were identified, almost everyone wanted to get rid of them.

The itch to run or destroy others' lives re-emerged with the current variant strain - the "human rights" commission movement.

2. But here's why I think we can win:

Each outrageous decision, aggressively claiming new territory, radicalizes a new group of citizens against the growing oppression.

Maybe restauranteur Gator Ted doesn't read commentator Mark Steyn (who was charged under the Ontario HRC).

But given that Gator is dragged through a hell of destruction because he asked a guy smoking pot in his doorway to leave, every restaurant owner needs to pause and ... think. "Should I just ignore this fellow's plight, or should I help disarm the menace before it comes round to me?"

Fine, ignore Gator Ted and others in a similar plight.

Next time, it will be a different menace - and it might be yours:

How about this?

- A cook who refuses to follow public health guidelines for hand washing because she has skin problems? [disability rights may trump the health and safety of clients]

- A waiter who refuses to serve a dish that contains ingredients forbidden in his religion? [an employee's religious rights may trump the customer choices that are key to the business's survival.]

- A person who overhears a conversation at the next table that she finds offensive, and blames the restauranteur for creating an environment that exposes her to "hate"? [the owner may be responsible for however anyone "feels" on the premises.]

In normal Canadian society, the first two people would be advised to seek other employment and the second to ask the maitre d' to move her to another, better table.

But under the "human rights" regime, the business owner may face the loss of the business, because the plaintiff's fees are paid by the taxpayer. But the accused/convicted (it often amounts to the same thing) is on the hook for all fees and awards to the plaintiff in a hostile system.

Also, the accused/convicted cannot recover from the plaintiff if, by chance, he escapes the net after spending tens of thousands of dollars. Can we all spell Shakedown?

Business owners of Ontario: Don't wait till it happens to you. Act now. Support the reform!