[Thatcherite]

Already addressed in a previous post. When you have a fish that evolves into something that is not a fish and more complex than a fish, call me. Otherwise, you're no different than that street preacher standing on the corner with the sign that says, "The End is Near."

Define "not a fish".

Define "more complex than a fish".

I note that you've given up on the "no observed speciation" lie, and now you've moved on to a different creationist canard.

Hmmm, what previously made observations does your street-preacher's sign confirm? What successful predictions have been made using it? What hypothetical observations would falsify it? If you have sensible answers to those questions then you can rate the preacher's sign as a theory. Until then it is just a baseless assertion, unlike scientific theories such as the theory of evolution.

[Shadowfax]

"Define 'not a fish'."

"Not a fish" refers to something that is other than a fish. For further information, please see a dictionary.

"Define 'more complex than a fish'."

"More complex than a fish" refers to something that is biologically more complex than a fish. i.e., A human being. ("i. e." means "for example." Just trying to circumvent your next round of definitional confusion.) I've peeked, and that's the end result of little evolutionary theory. I'm actually cutting you a break by letting you start with fish. The actual theory has the beginning of the chain at primordial soup. You know, it's actually pretty funny. Evolution would make a good comedy routine. There once was a bowl of primordial soup that imagined that it was a man.......

"Hmmm, what previously made observations does your street-preacher's sign confirm? What successful predictions have been made using it? What hypothetical observations would falsify it? If you have sensible answers to those questions then you can rate the preacher's sign as a theory. Until then it is just a baseless assertion, unlike scientific theories such as the theory of evolution."

You are obviously mistaking my intent. I was not attempting to raise the sign held by my street preacher to the level of a scientific theory. I was lowering the "theory" of evolution to the level of a religious doctrine. Actually, I wasn't trying to do that either. My bad. Evolution is at the level of a relgious doctrine. You're the one who's trying to elevate evolution to a standard that it does not merit - that of a serious scientific theory.

Good luck. You'll need it.

Or maybe I should say, God bless you. You'll need a miracle.