A scientific premise starts with evidence and builds with logical conclusions.
Agreed.
In the case of Darwinism: they start with the ASSUMPTION that appearance of design does not indicate invisible Designer, unlike Creationism which assumes the opposite.
Darwinism begins with gross illogic and no evidence can ever overcome starting perverse logic.
I would agree that creationists are often clueless and pursue scientific questions in an infantile and unscientific manner.
Ordinary Atheist philosophy.
The typical creationist, it appears, cannot even comprehend simple statements of topics, and feel they can talk about whatever suits their fancy - as an example - and then argue that they are on topic when clearly (to a rational mind) they are not.
Since you are an evolutionist your opinion is quite predictable with no objective value whatsoever.
If a Creationist had said what you had just said then the same applies. The point is, RAZD, is that we know how you feel about Creationists. Mindless and rhetorical insults is the refuge of the intellectually defeated.
Ray
™ Version 4.2
