Not my balliwick; ask Vade. Why don't you do something useful. Like offer an alternative theory for a change? You know, a theory? Supported by positive evidence, explaining the existing observations, and that makes unique predictions of future observations?
It's certainly more productive than deliberate obtuseness and snide sideline commentary. After all, if we're going to cast evolution aside, we'll need something useful to replace it.
I am doing something useful. I am pointing out the ridiculous nature of your Darwininian nonsense. Not your balliwick[sic], but you sure tap-dance alot on the subject. I have offered different opinions. They are expressed by James Shapiro among others. But your B.S. folks don't spend one second on the data before calling it names. It is not snide to ask the question where do you place the Pakicetus? It is snide to bring in ellipses etc. You have no answer I take it. That is because the bones are hollow.
There is such a theory and it has been discussed many times on this site, it is called intelligent design. It has been proven many times to be true and it at the same time proves evolution to be false. The bacterial flagellum is the most famous proof, however there are many more. The story in the article about Newton is one. In fact it has been proven through since then, that is why atheists are proposing an infinite amount of universes as the explanation for our universe. Another proof is the impossibility of abiogenesis which I show in the above article. Another proof is that biologists call the developmentat process whereby one cell multiplies into 100 trillion cells in exactly the correct place, of the exactly correct type during development a program. That is a trifecta against materialism and no one can refute it.