You have to think so - tertium non datur.
No, I don't
have to think anything.
So if a darwinist cannot obscure the problem with "sexual selection" I can tell pretty well what a darwinian explanation is, ass.
You're acting like an ass because you're labelling me as a
darwinist, whatever that is, and then telling me that I
must think like other darwinists.
Even a Creationist could explain to you your misunderstanding of the Theory of Evolution. Would you tell them that they must think those things too?
I’m not familiar with those species but that doesn’t really matter for what I’m trying to say.
It matters.
It doesn't matter because all I'm trying to do is explain to you your misunderstandings on what the Theory of Evolution says. It doesn't matter if the Theory is correct or not to show that you're misunderstanding the theory (be it true or false).
how is it possible that on the same area and at the same time coexist many similar species (larvae or butterfiles) with different behaviour and different color patterns and yet obviously with the same set of predators?
They have different genotypes.
Do you see there any "natural selection" in action?
Its not always easy to "see" the natural selection. I'm sure it gets pretty complicated.
Its funny to you because you’ve misunderstood it or are 'looking at it backwards'.
I can assure you that it is funny to some experts too, or at least weird - I quoted them elsewhere
Fuck your experts, I'm typing to you.
Random mutation has nothing to do with evolution.
But we are typing about your misunderstanding of the
Theory of Evolution, of which, random mutation has very much to do with.
All mutations we observe destroy genetic information.
But that is just false.
I don't even want to get into it with you. You seem to have a motive against the ToE and I doubt you would even listen. Besides, I've seen your posts before and "you aint havin any of it".
What is your motive against the ToE and why do you have it?
Are you a creationist? An IDist? What's
your problem with it?
No darwinian explanation: consequently stuff is irrelevant.
Bullshit. You just
wish that was true so you can maintain your motive. That's intellectually dishonest.
You
want to not accept the ToE. Why is that?
And why refer to it as
darwinian? Hasn't the theory changed since him?