A Guide to the tactics of Evolutionists

Randman writes:6. The idea that natural selection is an agent for macroevolution, completely unsubstantiated as the forces of natural selection appear to limit genetic diversity, not increase it.7. The idea that microevolution is an example of macroevolution writ small. Once again, it's a false idea because the forces of microevolution tend to limit genetic diversity, not increase it.\8. Claiming the fossil record shows evolutionary transitions when in reality, it shows the opposite.I could go on and on, but perhaps some other critics of evolution would like to add to the list......after all, we want to make sure people are not conned.

Randman writes:All that may have missed your point, however....I'll take a look at those threads you mentioned....

Buzsaw threadAll that may have missed your point, however....I'll take a look at those threads you mentioned.... quote writes:Hi Ned. The problem with your advice is that your interpretation of the observed requires replication whereas the Genesis hypothesis does not. You don't replicate sudden creation of a pair of a species which go on to propagate into millions relatively rapidly by design of an eternal supreme architect. Your hypothesis/theory allegedly takes billions of years to produce one species from scratch, i.e. form some kind of mysterious singularity bit of space and even likely millions to get from the soup to living thinking breathing sexy organism capable of and inclined to reproducing so as not to die out before the mate get's caught up in the process. (I always wondered how the first species of anything survived long enough to syncranize with the evoluton of a mate capable of reproduction?? Seems as though you'd need millions or billions of the same thing evolving until one came out capabable of and willing to bed down with the lover with all the complex serum and anatomy parts required for business. Abe: How likely is that going to happen? The lonely first organism must have allegedly had to achieve some kind of pretty deviant orgies to even begin to originate the process and accomplish a lot in a hurry before it died.Hey, I'm not trying to be funny. I'm serious. That's gotta be quite a feat with nothing capable of thinking to oversee and guide/design the process, hasn't it now when the brightest of wonderfully intelligent beings can't even create simple life with all our sophisticated technology?

NWR writes:I agree with Wounded King, that it would be better to start a separate thread for this. I'll note that Archer Opterix has proposed such a thread at Thread Sex Sex Sex in Forum Proposed New Topics. That could be promoted to Forum Showcase, in which case Archer Opterix would be unable to participate. Or it might be better for you to start a similar thread here, and the existing PNT could be promoted to a parallel thread for other evolutionists to discuss.