While at first glance it's a funny way to snub your nose at creationism by substituting a religious symbol (the fish) for a scientific symbol (the fish evolved into a land animal), at second glance it seems to imply (especially to a religious person who'd have a fish on their car) that you worship science.
Which isn't the case, in my case, anyway. I believe it's rational to accept most of the well-confirmed theories of science, like, say, the theory of evolution, but science is an evolving thing itself, modifying itself over time in response to new evidence, to human foilbles, to cultural changes. It's a human endeavor, a powerful one, but ultimately human.
And evolution is a case in point. Darwin is less the father of evolution than he is the father of the theory of Natural Selection, which is so heavily constrained by other factors, and is itself an almost unfalsifiable any time to you try to unpack the notion of what is "more fit".
Why I will never have one of those Darwin fish on my car
Which isn't the case, in my case, anyway. I believe it's rational to accept most of the well-confirmed theories of science, like, say, the theory of evolution, but science is an evolving thing itself, modifying itself over time in response to new evidence, to human foilbles, to cultural changes. It's a human endeavor, a powerful one, but ultimately human.
And evolution is a case in point. Darwin is less the father of evolution than he is the father of the theory of Natural Selection, which is so heavily constrained by other factors, and is itself an almost unfalsifiable any time to you try to unpack the notion of what is "more fit".