Argument #1: Transitional Fossils

[SteelCurtain]

This is getting sad, Rev. You cannot link to any scholarly sources? Is it because you can't find any that fit your views?

Casey Luskin has done nothing in these articles but sensationalize a scientific find, and then link to his own articles as proof of his claim. He's a lawyer. And he's good at doing what creationists have to do: fabricate an imaginary controversy within the scientific community where there is none.

You know what, Rev---case in point about your intense dishonesty here--- you claim that the Earth is 6,000 years old, yet you'll link to an article claiming geologic time on the order of millions of years. So you'll eat up anything so long as it supports your claim, even if it belies a previous claim, huh?

---

Rather than linking sources that use The Discovery Institute as a reference, and ADVERTISE INTELLIGENT DESIGN, perhaps you could answer the above question.

evolutionnews.orgEdit
Requires work:

Fifelfoo (talk) 07:28, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
External links report: [1]

Summary of problem
79 external links that may be inappropriately used. Evolution news is an unedited news aggregator/blog.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/09/ is linked from Creation and evolution in public education
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/12/post_6.html is linked from Creationism

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia...onnews.org

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/10/the...02669.html is linked from Discovery Institute failed verification: misconstrued source. Fifelfoo (talk) 10:09, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia...onnews.org

The internet is wonderful. You can hold people accountable for their dishonesty immediately.