I dismissed what he was saying because it was based upon a false premise. He was claiming that nobody questioned evolution. You're actual proof that's not true. If the initial premise is false, then the sections built on that become irrelevant. I've already said this. What gaps are there in the theory of evolution?
That's not an answer to what I said. At all. As for what backs me, the scientific community does. Practical, functional science does. You?
Fossil gap, horizontal not vertical evolution, no one has witnessed all adoects if whatvis proposed, false conclusions etc Based on whatvyou have said you should dismiss it no?
None of that is true. It's all utter bollocks made up by creationist lunatics with no scientific knowledge. Feel free to post some examples, though.
Science backs you in who won a debate between a rabbi and Dawkins? Methinks not Student vote backs me, you?
No, science backs me on evolution. A debate about morality in front of a Rabbi's society is irrelevant. As I asked before, what was the student vote? You don't know, because you haven't even seen it. As usual, you're just latching on to whatever you think supports your feelings about an issue.
Remind me what we were discussing here? Its for your ssje as you seem confused or are deliberately changing the discussion I gave names and dates, just no YouTube link You want numbers for student vote don't you?
Can't you just answer the question for once? So he was not a creationist and is an evolutionist? Yet he questioned the basic presumptions of evolution Or how about romers gap? Is that creationist nollox?
We're discussing some Hare Krishna bloke that wrote a book of bullshit. You decided that a debate on evolution supported your claims that evolution isn't true, for some reason. I pointed out that it didn't. You got upset. What's ssje?
That should have said sake So you don't know, thanks for clearing that up Typical of you, backed into a corner so change the conversation Same old pnp
I did answer the question. You asked what he is. I said he's dead. That's a clear answer. What basic presumptions of evolution did he question? Stop being evasive. If you want to discuss something, then just lay out what it is. Your DMD-lite game of 20 questions is utterly boring. Romer's gap isn't an issue. What problem do you think it causes for evolution?
I've told you exactly what you asked and that's me changing the conversation? You're the one that changed it. We were discussing that video, then you changed it to something else entirely. Utterly dishonest.
You said what I posted was creationist bollox, right? I said is he a creationist, dead or alive wasn't the question Romers gap IS an issue if you believe it is not creationist and that a fossil gap in evolutionary theory is creationist bollocks Do you now change your statement that a gap in the fossil record is creationist bollocks?
Non-evolutionists take the fossil record more at face value. Instead of hypothesising a large number of Precambrian animals for which there is no fossil evidence, they take the fossil record to show that the Cambrian animals did not evolve gradually from a common ancestor, and came into being through intelligent design. Just saying like.
It is creationist bollocks. None of the things that you posted are actual problems with evolution. Romer's gap wouldn't be an issue even if it wasn't being bridged. Recent discoveries are doing just that, though. You're throwing out things that you don't understand, because you've read them somewhere. They're not actual issues for the science.
