The Power of the New Intelligent Design...

Let me spell it out for you. The dispute is about common ancestry. The debate is not about whether or not we see a nested pattern.So you claiming that there is no dispute about nested hierarchy is just useless. But you don't even understand that now, do you?

Empty claims. You don't even understand what proof means.

If you are interested in colours and personal perceptions, then maybe science is not for you.I just listed all different views that exist about the origin of biological species. Why would I leave out any view, especially a view that a lot of people hold?I've received disrespectful comments after just asking a few questions. And even you are accusing me of a lot of things.What do you even mean by "no model to take its place"? I listed all possible more or less plausible options I know of.I know you evolutionist are so proud of your pretty model, and you go around dancing, thinking look at us what a pretty mode we have and you don't have.I don't care about which model is prettiest or whatever. Only relevent question is, which is correct. But that seems to be the last question you evolutionists are asking.

I'm just discussing what is being discussed, without fixed goal. See if I can find one evolutionist who argues based on facts.But you don't seem to have interest in that either.

You don't seem to know how it works, do you?In a model where the sun orbits around Earth, we can predict that we see the sun rising every morning and going under every evening. Observations from Earth fit that prediction perfectly.Do you believe that the sun orbits around Earth?
Are observations of sunrise and sunset flawed? Do they fail to meet the predictions of Sun orbiting around Earth?If you are stuck at simple observations from Earth only, without advanced tools, you will never learn about the real orbits.So good luck sticking to some nested pattern and asking all the wrong questions.

I said what I said.Feel free to move on.

Wow, I already responded to that. But you prove yourself to be as ignorant as can be. So let me repeat one step at a time. As that seems to be all you can handle. But I doubt you can even handle that.Do you believe that Sun orbits around Earth?

Funny how you accuse me of having no point after proving that you missed my previous point completely. I had enough of your dumb accusations. You evolutionists keep demonstrating that you lack the basic sense of logic.

You keep adding subjective "no reason" for creation. How have you determined that?Heliocentric model did not exist in earliest days. And even if it existed, it would be considerd parsimonous, would it. And your rule of parsimony would favor geocentric model. Another reason why I do not share your rules you so inconsistently apply as you please.

Eye witnesses testifying about what they see, is not data either then? You should learn what data is.Feel free to choose your most convincing prediction. If you dare.

You have been constantly trying to find a straw man to attack.And I showed you how your questions are based on false logic and incorrect assumptions. But you don't even understand that. You instead ignore it and fire the same questions again and accuse me of whatever.Do you think observations of sunrise and sunset are flawed? Do you think this is a useful question to ask? I don't think so. So stop and think for once, before asking nonsense questions.

Haha evading the question is best you can do. So you want to repeat the crime or disregard eye witness accounts as data?

I meant to say that geocentric required less assumptions and less parameters than heliocentric, for the data available thousands of years ago. So geocentric was more parsimonous than heliocentric.

Continue with your monologue, but don't bother me with your nonsense and ignorance. If you don't understand how your questions are poor, even after it has been spelled out for you multiple times, then you are hopeless.

That is your problem. You keep arguing against things nobody said. That is called a monoloque. Has anybody claimed that it is poor to compare prediction with data? No. So you should fix your problems before discussing anything.