I found my study of anthropology to... diminish my view of science.
What I was taught in anthropology was much like the three wise men (magi) visiting the stables / manger.
What I was taught sounded really plausible and had me questioning my beliefs and previous knowledge. (which was good, but an unstable time) So, then I got out of college, and learned about all the hoaxes involved in the field of anthropology. And I learned that all the things taught to me as facts where little more than theories with very little evidence (in some cases, none)
I was very disappointed in science.
The biggest lie in anthropology is that the evidence of micro evolution is proof of macro evolution. (when there is no proof, and some can argue, no evidence.)
There is no distinction between "micro" and "macro" evolution. The latter is just a lot of the former. Those terms are also not used by real biologists. They were invented by creationists specifically so they could concede examples of evolution that can be directly observed (in single celled organisms, because they live, reproduce and die so rapidly) but still deny that it happens to multicellular life, or that it can proceed far enough that speciation occurs.
The problem with this is that evolution does not only happen to small things. It acts on anything capable of self-replicating with occasional copying errors (mutation). There are also no magical boundaries that stop evolution at a certain point, preventing a species from changing until it is unrecognizable.
The concept of "kinds" is another one that only creationists take seriously. It does not exist in biology. Creationists say "Wolves can evolve into dogs but they both still look like dogs, so they are the same kind." To say that they look samey to human beings is not terribly scientific.
There's also the matter of the archaeopteryx. It is a clear example of a proto=bird but with saurid features, such as the dinosaur snout with sharp teeth instead of a beak. Interestingly, the genes for those saurid features have not been lost, just switched off, and still exist in the genome of modern birds.
Because of this, scientists have been able to switch those genes back on in fertilized chicken eggs, and the resulting chicken embryos had dinosaur shaped snouts with teeth instead of a beak.
Birds have those genes because they descended from dinosaurs. Fish don't have those genes. Insects don't have them. Are birds and dinosaur the same "kind"? I would say not, they look(ed) very different. So then how does a creationist explain the archaeopteryx fossil remains, or the dormant saurid genes in modern birds?
Thanks for typing this up saved me the work.
The word kind in the bible(for non-creationists) would better be understood as "inheritance"
Perhaps I can save you even more work:
https://steemit.com/religion/@alexbeyman/to-christians-who-accept-evolution-is-nature-obviously-the-work-of-an-intelligent-designer-the-authors-of-the-bible-apparently
https://steemit.com/scams/@alexbeyman/don-t-get-tricked-bro-how-to-recognize-a-cult
https://steemit.com/religion/@alexbeyman/diagram-of-a-memetic-virus
https://steemit.com/religion/@alexbeyman/jesus-predicted-a-first-century-return-that-did-not-occur
https://steemit.com/science/@alexbeyman/substance-dualism-the-creationism-of-the-21st-century
A lot of us Christians take the 7 days of creation, or 7 periods of organization as seven earth 24 hour periods, not taking into account that John the apostle stated in the book of Revelation that the divine day is composed of 1000 of our earth years. That being said it would make the Earth about 13,000 years old according to a litteral and holistic interpretation of the Biblical times line. That would make the univers about that same age that Edwin Huble estimated it to be, before geologists fudged his calculations to accommodate their millions of years of sedimentation hypothesis This begs the question how was all the sedimentary rock on the continents deposited and creatures so perfectly presserved in those sedaments with no sign of decomposition? Could it be that during a time when the Earth was subjected to emence tidel forces and its temporature drop passed the dew point that these condition combined to caused aquafers to rise and the mist soked atmosphere to condence in a torential rain that lasted 40 days and 40 night covering the earth with boiling water under extreme pressure depositing millions of year of sedement in the course of a single year and stacking life forms in an appearent order of evolution, that actually lived on earth together at the time, through the prosess of centrafugation.
I've read the theory's of centrafugation liquefaction and the like. The have some major difficulties if you actually go out into the field and test them. Fossilized track-ways and other fossilized remains of bio-activity or fossilized geological processes just to name two.
Anthropology, like everything has its quacks, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater...
Oh yes, micro-evolution is completely fascinating. The emergence of new sub-species... I am sure we will see some actual happening in the next couple generations.
Like the new large coyotes (or small wolves) that have taken over the in between lands of north america.