He says:
"Therefore, the cause of that which natural selection comes to act upon still stands in need of an explanation. You cannot use natural selection as an explanation for that which natural explanation clearly presupposes without becoming entangled in completely circular thinking, and this certainly does not constitute an explanation of any kind."
He does not understand, therefore, that what natural selection acts on is mutation.
He says:
"Moreover, the idea of the accumulation of small variations does not really account for either the origins of life in general..."
But of course the theory of evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of life.
He says:
"... or for the origins of the different biological blueprints, so to speak, on which the notion of species difference is based."
This looks like plain nonsense to me, but maybe you can explain it.
What are these "different biological blueprints"?
He says:
"Genetics is not the science which provides an account of the story of the origins of this capacity. Rather, genetics is merely the science which delineates how such a capacity operates once it has arisen."
This is a flat lie. Of course the theory of genetics provides an account of the origin of variation.
Genetics is not, of course, "merely the science which delineates how such a capacity operates once it has arisen." That would be the law of natural selection.
He says:
"Everything that is necessary for understanding this material has been included within the context of the direct and cross examinations which take place during the trial."
Obviously this is not true. The evidence for science is not compressed in his book.
He says that his book will allow you to:
"Be the first kid on your block to actually know what one is talking about when the conversation turns to evolutionary theory."
And yet he does not know what the theory of evolution is.
And
you haven't been bothered to learn what you're talking about, but you demand that I explain it to you.
You're lucky that I had a spare ten minutes.
As for your falsehood about how I am "evading the question", no, I am not. But unless I have some spare time, as I do right now, why should I waste my precious hours on explaining what the question is ---
to someone who has been too lazy to find that out for himself?
If you want to know about biology, second-hand biology textbooks are cheap.
If you can't be bothered to learn, why are you asking these asinine questions?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2