Don't panic<quoted text>
...and as I expected, after a more thorough reading, the usual tripe.
As if a stand-up debate lasting an hour or two with talking points covering mountains of scientific data means anything. In this case, so called "elephant hurling" was perfectly justified.
Not good enough. Read my link and then, if you are capable, HONESTLY tell me whether that superficial debate, conducted in front of a hostile audience and reported with obvious bias, can even scratch the surface of the real issues.
Oh, and by the way...the "my guy" that "your guy" supposedly smashed was not the guy who wrote:
Unfortunately for you, these tactics and one-liners will not win scientific debates even if they play well to a fundie audience who are really just watching a political debate, not a scientific one.
Nor will the cowardly little smears written in the "style" of a real scientific paper have any effect, as per the mitochondrial paper you posted. Might fool willing idiots like you, but they do not fool scientists and more intelligent lay people who still have their critical faculties intact.
I have seen noanswers before
Never impressed by it
But that was years ago
Please don't think I only read Creationist literature
That just ain't true...
Just like evolution