[Sopater]

I find the Argument from Authority one of the weakest arguments in this debate.

Why is an ideological argument from a scientist any stronger than an ideological argument from a lawyer? Even with all of the advances we've made in science over the last 200 years, none have "scientifically" advanced the ToE.

[allmendream]

“Even with all of the advances we've made in science over the last 200 years, none have “scientifically” advanced the ToE.” Sopater

Kamura’s neutral mutation theory was not a scientific advancement of the theory of evolution through natural selection? How about founder effect? Discovery of ERV’s? The sequencing of the Genome?

When one drinks from the wells of ignorance one apparently drinks DEEP.

[Soliton]

Even with all of the advances we've made in science over the last 200 years, none have "scientifically" advanced the ToE.

????????????. How about the discovery of DNA? How about deciphering the human genome? How about the discovery of ring species and intermediate forms in the fossil record? Your ignorance of evolution is profound.

[jalisco555]

Why is an ideological argument from a scientist any stronger than an ideological argument from a lawyer? Even with all of the advances we've made in science over the last 200 years, none have "scientifically" advanced the ToE.

Not so at all. For example, the sequening of human and other species' DNA over the past decade has added enormous evidence in support of evolution.