Yet the premise is testable, as demonstrated. That's the point. That's how science works.And that same evidence is open to other interpretations. If one doesn't begin with the premise that transumtation of species is true, he can very easily arrive at other conclusions. Proof is not based on speculation and conjecture.
False, as demonstrated.Perhaps not, at least regarding adaption within a species. However, there is controversy, both scientific and otherwise, over whether one species evolves into another.
The issue was resolved already. In fact it was before you got here.This thread is very near the 100 post mark which is my limit for responding. If the issue can't be resolved within 100 posts, it's not going to be.
Your baseless opinions are irrelevant.I'll leave where I entered and say that I think all the opposition against the proposed bill is ridiculous.
Science is synonymous with critical thinking. The law is like demanding driving tests must be done in cars that specifically have wheels. It's superfluous.Merely teaching students critical thinking skills and encouraging them to apply it to Darwinism, or any other topic they may encounter in life, is precisely the ultimate goal of education. We don't need kids mindlessly regurgitating what someone else has stored in their brains. We need them to think on their own.
If we are fearful then how come we are the only ones who have discussed the subject of evolution and you have avoided it entirely? How come I specifically asked you to subject evolution to valid criticism and you avoided it, EXACTLY as I predicted?If Darwinism is as nearly proven fact as you all claim it to be, you wouldn't be so fearful of opposing discussion.
If evolution lacked evidence as you claimed it did, you wouldn't be fearful of opposing discussion.Ciao.
Guest, what specifically about ERV markers at orthologous loci amongst the great apes demonstrating common ancestry do you take issue with?
I think it is only fair by now for you to actually discuss the matter rather than respond to us with yet another vacuous dismissal without explanation, that is if you wish to retain some semblance of intellectual integrity, yes?
You've been provided with precisely what you asked for, you've been given scientific sources. You have claimed that evolution should be put under critical scrutiny and now you have that chance. Why are you backing out now? Isn't this exactly what you have been demanding all along?
Do you understand why orthologous ERV's are considered such strong evidence of common ancestry? If you do not then you are unable to claim it is insufficient. If you do, you have no reason to avoid discussing the subject with me, which I am more than willing, and capable of doing. So for the benefit of everyone here, given your VAST biological and general scientific knowledge, please inform us where Dr's Johnson and Coffin went wrong in regards to the observed retroviral DNA sequences and why?
I thank you in advance and appreciate your informed thoughts on this matter.
Oh wait. You ran away. You did EXACTLY what you claimed your opposition does while we did not.
This is why the scientific community never takes you seriously.