candyass writes:
Every concepts that evolutionists have invented are
methodically being destroyed by the truth.
That would be interesting to see. Where is this happening and what method is being used?
quote
Remember when wide-eyed evolutionists strutted around
they screamed
These same evolutionists ranted and raved
Remember how Darwin and his blind followers swore to high heaven
—candyass
Since you didn't give us a single valid example, you seem to be the one who is raving mad.
candyass writes:
Oh yeah. In the year 2001, the 101 biology textbooks
at Murray State (and numerous other places)were
still using Hackel's fraudulent embryos illustration.
Talk about dishonesty.
Yeah, let's talk about dishonesty.
So, you're bitching about a book that had a drawing in it 2 decades ago?
Do you have the title and author of this alleged book?
Please describe what exactly is fraudulent about Haeckel's drawings and why anyone should care about it today?
candyass writes:
Isn't it ludicrous to think that homologous structures
are more indictive of common descent than they are
of a common designer?
No, not when you consider that we have overwhelming evidence of common descent and not a single example of a designed organism.
candyass writes:
The fact is that all these organs were designed
for specific purposes.
I won't tell you what these purposes are unless
you ask. I want to see if you are really ignorant
of these design purposes.
And again, I won't tell you their respective design
purposes unless you admit that you just can't
figure them out--that their usage is above your
intelligence level.
Since there is no such thing as
"designed purposes" in living organisms, only human made artifacts, we will have to wait for you to enlighten us. I will not hold my breath.
candyass writes:
Why would blind and random evolution lead to
Improvement?
Why indeed?
First off, evolution is not blind or random and second, no one says it leads to improvements.
candyass writes:
There is not a law that says this is
a requirement.
That is why no one claims there is such a law.
candyass writes:
There is not one law in nature that
states complex organs can be constructed little
by little; generation after generation.
That is why no one claims there is such a law.
candyass writes:
One can believe this if one wishes to do so. But,
I would rather stick with real science.
Great, are you going to do that anytime soon?
Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty PythonOne important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
™ Version 4.2
(1)
