Replies

I have also explained to you the difference between evolving in small steps and "geologically sudden." Gould himself has explained it to you. Nothing is that different from its parent. For all that, a change over a period of 20,000 years is "geologically sudden."

Only in Vade Retro's world

And in Darwin's world, Gould's world, and the world of 21st-century science. You have been showered with supporting material at this point and you are staying dumb.

Hint: dumb is not smart. Never mind you force the lurker to ask, "Is he really THAT dumb?"

If Gould says that PE is not a hopeful monster theory, it shouldn't matter what Sarfati or Coulter or whatever other nonsense-peddler has told you. I can link the stuff, but I can't read it to you. You have to WANT to not look like a retard.

And I have tried to explain to you that "small steps" means gradual. It can't mean anything else. And when someone says "Many large groups of facts are intelligible only on the principle that species have been evolved by very small steps" that person is a gradualist.

I have been trying to educate you on this but you have your fingers securely in your ears and your eyes squeezed shut.

Hint: dumb is not smart.

Yet for some reason you fail to take your own advice. hmmm.

If Gould says that PE is not a hopeful monster theory,

PE is not a hopeful monster theory. It is something designed to account for the gaps in the fossil record and save neo-Darwinism.

You have to WANT to not look like a retard.

Again, follow your own advice. Take the fingers out of your ears and open your eyes.