I responded. You avoided it. Just as you've avoided so many.and some joker wanting to take me on over ervs, and none of you can do anything more than prattle on and have provided nothing of substance.
I did. You ignored it.Try providing links to research instead of postulating yourself to be a baboon.
I provided *potential* falsifications. You provided none that I postulated. Ergo *both* your claims that evolution was non-falsifiable and therefore not scientific, and that you had falsified evolution are erroneous.Good then I do not have to say anything more!
TOE is falsified. I agree. Is that what has been the bee in your bonnet all along?
Also not that your first claim contradicts your second. Because hypocrisy is a necessary requirement for creationists when they pretend to talk science.
Munched it. Your problem is that you can't predict what those functions are. We can. And you still can't address the fact that it's not function of DNA that was the issue here but rather the hierarchial DNA pattern which is predicted by evolution, not creationism.You can also suck up the fact that some evo researchers are now suggesting that it is very likely that 100% of the genome is functional. Yippeeeee!!!!
'Prof X' lied in the very first sentences of his very first post. Because like you he prefers to attack caricatures instead of deal with reality.So in summation to you Proffessor where ever you are
I see once again you are repeating refuted arguments instead of dealing with rebuttals. If you keep spamming you may just convince the stupid such as AWI.The theory I prefer does not need the mystery of dark energy. It doesn't need God either, but it does challege the Copernican principle if ever validated.
You just contradicted yourself again. This time all in one sentence.Even your evo researchers cannot explain these whale bones and the carbon dating ended up being inconsistent, so dah!
Then why do chickens have DNA coding for teeth?The point being that I can make a prediction on non coding dna and it is being supported even by biased and convoluted evolutionary research, and I love it.
You are too stupid to understand that you cannot use such evidence as a reality-denying YEC without demonstrating you're dishonest.You however are too stupid to understand that in fact modern bird footprints dated to 212mya, whale bones in Michagan in strata 290myo
Been scientifically demonstrated? Not yet. But thanks for telling everyone your "scientific alternative" is Jewmagic. Unless you have a "scientific theory" of creationism that doesn't rest solely on anti-evolution arguments?I actually think God has
Creationists ignore reality.Well if there is so much of evidence to suport TOE how come you lot can never come up with any of it?
Had you checked the diagram and the writing they are not disputing fusion and the differences are still consistent with genetic drift. Hence again you are dishonestly misrepresenting others work.http://www.mun.ca/biology/scar r/Human_Ape_chromosomes.htm
So there are many inserted genes, sequences that run counter to predicted in the fusion model and telomeres in mankind that are shorter than any other non human ape.
What's the "scientific theory" of creationism again?