(May 29, 2014 at 2:41 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote:(May 29, 2014 at 2:16 pm)Heywood Wrote: Your claim was we have substantial evidence that the bacterial flagellum did in fact evolve. You were asked to provide evidence of your claim. You failed miserably because these links you provided only suggest that the flagellum could have evolved....not that it did evolve. You have provided evidence for what you and I already agreed upon...that the flagellum could evolve. But your claim went beyond that....you claimed we have evidence it did evolve.
Do you have such evidence?
My claim was that there is no evidence the bacterial flagellum was intelligently designed, let alone for "intelligent design" appearing anywhere in nature and far more evidence supporting it is an evolved organelle.
Twist and shift the burden of proof as much as you like to support your argument from ignorance, but you still have yet to demonstrate the theory of ID, mechanism of ID, and provide even a sliver of evidence in comparison to the log mansion that is scientific observation and explanatory power of evolutionary principles in biology, medicine, and every other natural science.
You didn't view a single link, did you?
Your claim was this:
(May 29, 2014 at 12:30 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: Except we have substantial evidence it did evolve.
Now you are claiming something else. Do you disavow your first claim?