To all of the critics of my article:
“Evolutionists have no evidence, not Star Wars, not swords, not pitchforks, not pointed shoes, nothing. When they wisely default on the Life Science Challenge it proves they are all bluff and no science, or as they say in the Southwest, all hat and no ranch. Now, you say you have a jumping frog that can beat our jumping frog but you refuse to put you money where your mouth is. Or you say you have a runner who can beat our runner or a jumper who can jump higher than our jumper. Well, let’s put them on a level playing field and see. The proof is in the results of the contest. The contest settles the issue with finality. Hot air contests never end. The Super Bowl and the World Series are not decided with hot air on web sites. If you are so sure of your position you would debate.” (Dr. Joseph Mastropaolo)
There are enough of you true-believers listed at http://www.lifescienceprize.org/ to raise the ten grand needed to undergo the mini-trial referred to as the “Life Science Prize”. Not only could you take Dr. Mastropaolo’s money, but you could shut my mouth.
The only problem is, the LSP would be based on observable objective SCIENTIFIC evidence, not Never Never Land “just-so” stories.
Evolutionists have bragged, got “called out” on their bragging, and have lost by default. Even six-year-olds know what to call something that struts around clucking. That’s why you don’t want school children to hear anything other than your propaganda.
I suggest you take a pilgrimage to Westminster Abbey and chant around Darwin’s tomb. At least you’d be leaving alone innocent public school students.
Karl Priest
Sorry to break it to you dude but I have not been a critic of your article or an evolutionist.
What are you actually arguing against old chum? Are you arguing that no evolution ever occurs (i.e there is no change in genetic make-up of a population over time)? Are you arguing that speciation doesn’t occur? That new organs do not arise over time?
You need to be more specific? I’m not surprised no-one has ever applied for the life-sciences prize, the wording is so vague, the terms left undefined, the site so bedecked in rhetoric - no-one is ever going to believe it is a real challenge.
If I can demonstrate the evolution of anti-biotic resistance in a bacterial colony over a few thousand generations, does that win the prize? Can’t really tell from those rules.