Amazingly, an ad hominem is still not an answer, just another in a long string of logical fallacies.
Simple yes or no answers are all that are required to address these simple concepts:
If you want a real discussion, preface your post stating that and begin to deal with specifics of what I posted, showing you understand the points raised and why you disagree.
Now, by your own standard, answer the questions from Message 223:
Let me repeat -- do you deny: (1) that variation between individuals exists within the populations of species? (2) that speciation has been observed? (3) that the greenish warblers show the gradation between forms that interbreed until a point is reached where two forms do not interbreed? (4)that the greenish warblers show a very clear spectrum of life that diverges until two components no longer interbreed? (5) that the variation shown by the greenish warblers in space is no different than the variation shown by other species in time: two populations diverging until a point is reached where two forms do not interbreed?
Is it really that hard to just answer these simple yes or no questions?
we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
In reality, Pakicetus did not have flippers and was a hooved land animal, but that never stopped evos. This probably was published when all they had was a skull, and the evo maxim seems to be, to me at least, to make a wild claim and assume it is true unless it can be disproven.
If you guys took the time to really look at some of absurdities within your own camp, you would not be so hostile with the doubters.