(May 9, 2014 at 1:29 pm)alpha male Wrote:(May 9, 2014 at 1:15 pm)Cato Wrote: Nope, just the ones that put your god in the unemployment line.No, just the ones that can't be supported with scientific evidence.
Exlax insists that I don't understand evolution if I reject the claim that evidence for microevolution is necessarily macroevolution, yet we've seen that there are evolutionist scientists who also hold that position.
Some linked to TO's 29 evidences. I showed some of the problems with the first one, and no one has pursued it.
Try cutting the insults and showing the proof.
Oh for fuck's sake. Just a quip as I have not engaged the debate. Get a grip.
I will now leave this observation. Your scepticism regarding the merits of macroevolution cannot be taken seriously since you obviously don't apply the same standard when evaluating the evidence for God. You must accept that evolution, including speciation, is the one best explanation for what we have thusfar observed. You have yet to provide another. Please note that you disagreeing with or not yet affirming macroevolution does not mean that it isn't still the best explanation. Your arguments here betray a conclusion already reached and a desperate attempt to rationalize it into existence.
