What Exactly Is for Certain?

How can we be sure that the Earth was not created in seven days, and that man did not descend from ape? The history of science and the ambiguity of the past keep many of us guessing because of the lack of proficient evidence and the fact that, although we may try having complete knowledge of many of life's origins, there is still much left the imagination. Though these questions are just one of the many questions left unanswered about the past, they reveal the real problem of uncertainty.

In relation to science, this field of study often appears to be solid, as well as complex and progressive of all areas of knowledge. This is most likely due to the many discoveries science has brought us. One of the many reasons we, as human beings, have advanced and evolved so much (speaking in terms of becoming a more efficient and civilized group of people as a whole and not in any relation to the ideals of Cecil Rhodes) is because of science and technology. But as we continue to "progress" during this present time and hopefully into the future, could it appropriate to say that we are losing sight of the past? There is often news about new breakthroughs and innovations occurring in the scientific world, but can one question how actually "recent" these discoveries are? In Oliver Sack's article "Scotoma: Forgetting and Neglect in Science", he explains that science is not continuous and progressive as it seems, and is often times very backwards and "contradictory". In the article, Sacks uses various examples of scientific discoveries that we acknowledge