Put up or shut up. If I have misunderstood a topic, prove your claim or STAND DOWN from the ad-hominem, diversionary tactic. Mike the wiz is not on trial here, and as soon as you make the topic about mike the wiz, is as soon as you have lost the debate.
Mike, I do not need to "prove" to you that you have not studied, for example, the anatomy of the platypus. You
know that you have not. You'd remember if you had.
But that can be regarded logically, simply as a statement of ignorance. I can simply argue that the development of the embryo in the womb is no less miraculous in it's wonder, just because it is natural.
And by the same token, you could call it "magical", too.
But I was using the terms "magic" and "miracle" in the strict, literal sense of supernatural feats. Unless you have a naturalist materialistic take on God, I don't see why you're objecting.
As for the substance of your post, what was it?
That creationism appeals to mechanisms of a kind we have never witnessed to produce zillions of results of a kind that we have never seen; and that this is not parsimonious.
Would you like to answer this point, or would you like to evade it with self-pitying whining and irrelevant drivel?