Microevolution, Iím completely sold on Doctor. So all those articles on microbiology I have no problem believing. I would venture to say out of that 135,000 articles, most were probably about microbiology.<quoted text>In 2009 there were 135,000 articles published in peer review and scientific journal supporting evolution. Guess how many were published refuting the FACTs of evolution......yep, ZERO, why is that do you suppose? If the TOE is so chalked full of speculation rather than hard cold facts, why has no one published anything pointing out these alleged flaws? Maybe you could publish something. Is there any reason why you couldn't have something published in a reputable scientific journal? If you feel so strong about how wrong the TOE is, and seem to know without doubt, then do the world a favor and publish something so we can all know how flawed the Theory is. Of course you just might have to demonstrate some knowledge on the subject, maybe make the publisher aware of your credentials as an expert on the subject. I'll be waiting for your article, I can't wait to hear how 135,000 experts on the subject are totally wrong, and you are right. Good Luck.
How many scientist are working directly on macro evolution? I would estimate that number to be very small compared to microevolution.
When I talk about speculation Doctor Iím always referring to macroevolution. This discussion about chromosome #2 is very interesting. When the chromosome fused that was the first mankind. With all 46 chromosomes just like we have today.
What I take from the chromosome #2 discussion is mankind came on the scene suddenly and not gradually as traditionally thought. This means there was a first man. That man Doctor was Adam.