RE: Evolution, religion, and ignorance.
May 8, 2014 at 12:45 pm
(This post was last modified: May 8, 2014 at 12:46 pm by John V.)
(May 8, 2014 at 12:28 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Easy. Very easy.Yes, I've read those and more, but they don't support your claim that this is "something the skinks have never been able to do before."
Quote:So now we're moving the goalposts?No, that was my original position.
Quote:I'm making the case that micro and macro aren't meaningful divisions to draw, and you're just going back to macro crap like I'm supposed to give a damn?I've already noted that your position regarding macro/micro is not unanimously held among biologists. In response you've attempted a burden shift/argument from ignorance fallacy, claiming that unless I can prove macroevolution-specific mechanisms, your position stands. In another current thread you're protesting that gemini is using that tactic, yet you use it yourself.
Quote:Whether they go in one direction or regress back, the changes still occur, and more importantly, some changes do go solidly in one direction, while at the same time branching out into numerous other potential forms, as demonstrated by fossil and genetic evidence all over the place. It would literally take up more space than the character limit on this window for me to go through it all, but the fact that you're still insisting that there's no evidence, while demonstrating a clear lack of understanding of the subject, just goes to prove my initial point in the OP.I'm not insisting that there's no evidence. I said I haven't seen compelling scientific evidence. That doesn't mean it's not out there. Just show it to me.
Quote:It's not my problem that you don't really understand how evolution and natural selection work, and that your only argument back is "it doesn't work that way in every case." Well, shit, we already knew that. But it works that way in so many cases that to pick out the few (or better yet, to fantasize about abstractions of cases so as to avoid doing even that much work) is simply ridiculous.You're correct that it's not your problem. It's also not your problem that you can't seem to present scientific evidence proving your position. It's just not a problem at all.
(May 8, 2014 at 12:25 pm)Bad Wolf Wrote: I already made that reference in another thread...... he didn't get it.Still don't...but we did end up going with the Town & Country. It's pretty nice.