If you are referring post # 88 above by me, with this link:
Is evolution pseudoscience? - creation.com I went so far as to also copy and paste the article itself with the link, so what is your complaint? unless you are speaking to a different link, then quote it and I will make it right. I must say though that I have clicked on every link I have posted and they all work for me. But let me know if any don't and I will C&P the content. But creation.com has already been done in post 88.
I checked the link again from post 83, that appears to be working now. I followed the link in post 88 which was working fine. Evidently just a temporary issue which another user noted above. Nothing to worry about.
I couldn't help noticing how you completely ignore the way your source is lying to you. Do you think that's the only lie they're telling or could there be more? Try following those sources sometime and see for yourself.
But true science doesn't claim new facts based on assumptions and unproven conclusions as evolution does. Science builds its conclusions upon foundations of proven and tested facts. You have no proof of anything in evo, yet you sit there and insist that your so called science is valid.
Nonsense. No true scotsman falacy aside, your understanding of how science works is just plain wrong. I'm not a scientist by vocation, but I understand that science is tentative and that we change our explanations to fit the facts. There is no proof; there is a tested explanation that fits all of the evidence we see. The explanation may be wrong but nobody has come up with anything better...especially the god botherers.
Dark energy stufff...
Off topic and you'll note that info.com is not a link to what scientists are actually saying...it's dumbed down so people like me can sort of understand it. This is no more science than a grade-school crayon drawing of the Mona Lisa is art.
Balderdash, TO THE MAX. You are just exposing first, your ignorance of the reliability of Gods word, and secondly your understanding of its consistency when one delves into every detail of it. You need to do better than that if your going to cause this believer to stumble and drop my belief system for the lies which yours represents.
Well, I was going to disagree but when you said "TO THE MAX" in all caps like that I had to reevaluate my position...such a potent and lucid argument. Consistency in the bible is a matter of interpretation. Oh, I don't want to make you give up your belief system Archangel, I just don't want you to try and teach it to the children of strangers under the color of science.
No I'm not equivocating at all. The fact is that evolution claims more than changes take place. It claims that all species life on earth, from plants through insects, up to fish all the way to we human beings share a COMMON DESCENT FROM ONE UNIVERSAL ANCESTOR WHO BORE US ALL THROUGH GENETIC DRIFT. In other words MACROEVOLUTION. That is what you believe occurred and nothing discovered in rapid adaptation shows changes in alleles which allow one species to evolve or adapt into another.
Look at it this way, much of what you evos call junk DNA just because you can't figure out what it does, is precisely that DNA which allows for rapid adaptation based on environmental pressures throughout the animal kingdom.
More caps...wow. Look, common descent is just fallout from the ToE; an observation of what we see in the light of evolution. If evidence that is contrary shows up then common descent will be abandoned which may or may not take evolution as we know it with it. Theories have been overturned in the past, so it's not impossible, in fact it's what every scientist lives for. But you're kidding yourself if you think all it will take to overturn the theory is rhetoric, opinion polls and school board meetings. When push comes to shove you will need an explanation that fits all the evidence better than the theory you're trying to overturn.
Show us the work.
™ Version 4.2