Re: Stereotypes and reputations

From: Cornelius Hunter <>
Date: Thu Aug 04 2005 - 00:59:31 EDT


You wrote:
Look, so far I have shown how vacuous your claims against CD really are, mostly are based on our ignorance and no alternative explanation is provided. Evidence that strongly support CD are ingnored in favor of some minor puzzles, or based on strawmen arguments (convergence for instance).
So what exactly IS your argument? Scientifically speaking that is? I am honestly trying to understand but so far most of your assertions seem to be best explained by lack of familiarity with the arguments or data. What am I missing?

Once again, the nested hierarchy is not a prediction of evolution, it is a retrodiction. To the extent that the pattern is real, it was known long before Darwin came around. The evolutionist's claim that this pattern is a prediction of evolution is false. Mechanisms are freely available to the evolutionist to explain other patterns, such as separate creations and temporarily high mutation rates (which are routinely appealed to by evolutionists).

Received on Thu Aug 4 01:02:04 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Aug 04 2005 - 01:02:04 EDT