When new evidence is uncovered, why do scientists always glom onto an evolutionary interpretation? There must be literally dozens of other valid interpretations of the evidence, why always evolution? I don't get it.
Because there's money to be made in shilling for evolution. How many gullible rubes fork over the donations - including governments with more grant money than sense - when evolutionists go on cable TV and ask for donations? It's a hell of a lucrative profession. Beyond that of course is that upsetting the applecart (and ruining so-called scientists' money machine) would cause extreme censure by their peers. You think a biology teacher at a university would
ever get tenure (and a guaranteed job for life where they didn't actually have to produce anything) if they published anything that contradicted the prevailing dogma? Hell, they can't even admit that past lies were made even when caught out - look at Haeckel's drawings still be used by evolutionists!