 | | Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"
|
|
(...) not (...) your (...) In other words, you can't back up your claims. You only want to stick to the subject if you get the last word ("Hardly - which wasn't on topic, but I wanted to have a zinger without a rejoinder"). Don't lecture me on what (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"
|
|
(...) I don't for an instant imagine that you won't attack what I say, but that's not the point with my opening post. Nor have I attempted to cite any evidence yet one way or the other. All I'm trying to do is state the tenants of macro evolution as (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"
|
|
(...) First - I've never said "leading" scientists, since that is always open to debate. I understand your thoughts/feelings on this - however, with this thread I'm trying to establish what it is that I should be addressing regarding evolution - (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"
|
|
(...) You keep making these claims, but I have seen no evidence of such (debate within science on if evolution happens). You are welcome to submit such (gotta be accredited scientists in scientific journals - spare me the religious crackpots). You, (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!"
|
|
(...) Jon: You've repeatedly mentioned leading scientists and overwhelming numbers to defend your case against evolution without giving actual names or numbers. For the umpteenth time, can you provide any actual names or numbers, other than those (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
