Pars, in principle, I agree.
I know you are familiar with his work, but for those who aren't.
A taste of the vash to come:
Most of the rest is telling stories on how life must have evolved. No science in stories.
On vestiges, i would say i doubt whatever research has gone into this subject.
Silly HOE's (hypothesis of evolutioners)
Why then the need to bandy words or debate semantics where an advantage for Camp Evolution would be gained by keeping the desired brevity of definition?
Nice wording. What about when life was created by a creator and "evolution" is just a variation within a kind.
I don't know what "biologically useful" means, and why it isn't useful to identify birds as things in the sky, and fish as things in the sea, and animals as things on the land and humans as the fallen masters of this world.
Instead of the "Theory of Evolution" it should be called the hypothesis of evolution.
The HOE. I like the bandy of words here at evc
The intro gets you buttered up by playing on semantic mind games.
Most of the rest is telling stories on how life must have evolved. No science in stories. The phylogenic tree makes astounding claims as to what evolved first, but this is based on mostly vertebrate life forms, what about the invertebrate? You know, most of the fossil record. I'd like to see a phylogenic tree from the cambrian layer of invertebrates.
yeah, i understood the yarns that spun my brain around unneccesarily. hypothesis on assumptions on hypothesis dabbed with some theory and even some facts to top it off.
The fact is the conclusions might be considered science by the extreme religious zealots in the fundamentals of HOE, however the initial guesswork assumptions are not. Or maybe its vice versa. whatever.
Like I said before, vestigial parts are freakin hilarious. I saw one today about the ear ridge on a human. I mean c'mon! Where do they come up with this stuff.
It's a religion, and should be left out of the definition of evolution.
As for joining miobio chik on a debate thread about vestiges, i'll do it. I haven't laughed enough this week. Although it's going to be pretty hard to convince me that whale reproductive anchor bones are tiny vestigial legs. lol that gets me every time.
I almost forget how good HOE's (hypothesis of evolutioners) are at assuming things. That kind of faith could be put to good use. ;p
Why is it always the opposition that doesn't understand? If I really wanted to immerse myself in scientific literature I'd watch certain porn. Because nothing screams ridiculous like midgets and absurd obesity.
Anywise, I used my superior techniques of speed reading (of which you are completely ignorant and stupefied) to skim the all of the articles. I had read them a few times prior to enlisting to EvC so I am aware of "evidences" for macro evolution. Which I think is a bunch of fairy tales and that's how I would paraphrase it to someone who hadn't read it.
Do you have any idea of the physics involved in sex magic?
You clearly are ignorant of science. ME: 4.3 billion You: 0
With minor editing for brevity's sake, this is nearly the entire opus from
RAZD's thread.
Content free, belligerent, and dragged a perfectly fine thread to its untimely death.
™ Version 4.2