.
you still looking for what exactly?
I am glad for you.
I am still looking.
you still looking for what exactly?
I am glad for you.
I am still looking.
you still looking for what exactly?
Meaning of life.The purpose of life.How appeared life on Earth and why.What is beyond the atom.What's beyond the universe.What are the fields.....
Stuff, you know.
yeah i have those questions, and more
.How appeared life on Earth .What is beyond the atom.What's beyond the universe.What are the fields.....
Stuff, you know.
//// this third instalment is also a quarantine area for threads that regurgipost all the usual creationist/evolution denialism stuff, such as:
-- scientists know that evolution is wrong, but are hiding that fact in order to retain their power;
-- evolution is just a theory;
-- Darwin recanted on his deathbed;
-- no one has seen a bacterium evolve into a fish;
-- there are no transitional fossils;
-- speciation has never been seen;
-- okay, speciation has been seen, but the creation of new Genuses has not;
///
Why RenaissanceMan do you deny evolution? Oh please lets hear your argument!
Why RenaissanceMan do you deny evolution? Oh please lets hear your argument!
Shhhhhs, I want to hear (SIC) RenaissanceMan reply!
Who said I "deny" evolution?
Those are YOUR words, not mine.
Since when was questioning tantamount to denial?
One cannot "hear" threads. One can only read them.
I promise not to bring up any of those points above if YOU, "Hercules," and your friends promise not to regurgipost all the usual Darwinist stuff, such as:
<list of tiresome strawman arguments deleted>
Threads such as this aren't discussions. They aren't reason. They certainly do not constitute debate.
They're Darwinists' condescension sessions, where everyone else is told to "shut up" because they're not worthy of The Anointed.
Do you still beat your wife? Stalk small children?Not me.
I was asking, note the question mark, not stating with a period.
:yawn:
What a surprise that a Creationist apologist (if not an outright Creationist) opens his/her position by listing a bunch of strawman “Darwinist stuff” that do not constitute the scientific underpinnings of the ToE.
….NOT!
Correct. Lame attempts to debunk the ToE with tired reguriposted wilfully ignorant material that has been doing the rounds since the advent of the interweb aren’t discussions, reason or debate.
See reference the lame arguments above.
You’re clearly itching to impress us with your masterful knowledge of the biological sciences, so off you go. Impress us.
(I wonder how long before you start copy and pasting Behe quotations. "rolleyes")
Nah - that would be boring - all we'd get is 50 year old arguments and out of date quotes copied and pasted from the usual extremist religious fascist sources that we've all seen a hundred times.
what would be interesting - and a complete first for one of the creationist taliban cadre - would be a consistent alternative to the current explanation for evolution that has a little more to say than "goddidit"
Do you mean the sequence space?1. What is the space of cytochrome c?.
I have seen this phrase used through ignorance; I have seen it used as a convenient simplifcation of a concept; I have never seen it offered up as a bald-faced lie. Would you cite three or four examples of such usage please.2. Why did biologists continue to make the bald-faced lie that "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" more than 100 years AFTER it had been discredited as a fraud?
Would you explain what the relevance of this is? In the meantime:3. Name at least two books written by biologists who use the terms "Darwinism" or "Darwinist" throughout their books..
Patel, you don't even have a clue as to what fascism means. Not a clue.
All you can do is feign enlightenment and ask for an "alternative."
"What is the approximate range of pKa values?" would, in your Darwin-In-Wonderland World be rebutted by "Do YOU have an alternative range, huh, huh, huh?"
Do you still beat your wife? Stalk small children?
Creation can never be an eliminated alternative.