Most Common Phrase in Evolution Media: “Earlier Than Thought”


We coined a new word tontologism

by David F. Coppedge

We coined a new word tontologism (look it up in the Darwin Dictionary [see quote below]) to account for a bad habit of Darwinians. They frequently say, when evidence goes against their previous beliefs, “we thought” – as if we includes the public. For instance, major innovations in evolution keep showing up “earlier than thought” in their terminology, as if everybody thought like Darwinians. Here are a few examples from recent biology and paleontology news to illustrate the Darwinians’ irresponsible attribution of blame, as well as the problems created by pushing evolution earlier than thought.

Walking fish suggests locomotion control evolved much earlier than thought (Science Daily). This example from last month shows authors of a paper having to revise their “thought” (not the public’s thought) about when walking locomotion first appeared. Who is to blame? See quote from the 17 Feb 2018 entry, “The Evolution of the Darwin Fish” where Jeremy Dasen said, “It has generally been thought that the ability to walk is something that evolved as vertebrates transitioned from sea to land.” Generally? Did you think that? The truth is, only Darwinians think that way, but by using a passive voice verb, Dasen has swept you into his fallacy without your permission.

Photosynthesis originated a billion years earlier than we thought, study shows (Astrobiology Magazine). At least this writer provides a subject, “we thought,” but it still leaves the subject unspecified. We might ask, “Who’s we, paleface”? To imagine a complex system like photosynthesis, composed of numerous finely-tuned parts, “originating” a billion years earlier, should be headline news with a title like, ‘Darwinian evolution found to be untenable.’ Instead, Dr. Tanai Cardona, lead author of the study that makes this outrageous claim, waltzes on to commit another tontologism: “My results mean that the process that sustains almost all life on earth today may have been doing so for a lot longer than we think.” Further down, the article supplies a subject, scientists (meaning evolutionary scientists). And yet the “earlier than thought” formula entails a much more serious problem for evolutionists: the replacement of Darwinian gradualism with abrupt appearance…

Tontologism, n.: A statement including the collective “we” that deserves a response from Tonto, the Indian co-star of the Lone Ranger TV series: namely, “Who’s ‘we,’ Paleface?” It comes from a joke about the Lone Ranger and Tonto finding themselves surrounded by dozens of screaming Indians on horseback galloping around them, brandishing their bows and arrows. The Lone Ranger looks at his partner and comments, “It looks like we’re in big trouble, Tonto.” Tonto looks at him with a wry grin, and asks, “Who’s ‘we,’ Paleface?”. Evolutionists have an obnoxious habit of using the first person plural when they find the facts contrary to their theories, as in “This fossil means we will have to rethink our story of butterfly evolution” or “We were totally wrong about much of what we thought we knew about stellar evolution.” For their readers who never accepted the evolutionary line to begin with, Tonto’s response is fitting.


image credit: Emiliano Vittoriosi