Replies

My "Darwininian nonsense"? How do you figure? 150 years ago Charles Darwin saw some little birdies and tried to figure out how they got that way. His theory has undergone constant revision ever since. Progress of science, rah rah rah.

Ol' Chuck might not even recognise the theory any more, but his initial insight laid the groundwork for a structure relating all life on this planet. Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species sound familiar? Without the theory of common descent, it hardly seems worth the effort.

And where exactly have I tap-danced? On the whale question? I'll state for the record: I don't have an answer for your concerns regarding whale evolution. Of course, that doesn't mean there isn't an explanation. Just that I don't know it.

You have not offered an alternative theory that I have seen. Your alternatives are either small modifications of current evolutionary theory, or a rehash of critiques of Darwin. As vehemently as you protest, there must be something revolutionary squirreled away inside your head.

I'll state for the record: I don't have an answer for your concerns regarding whale evolution. Of course, that doesn't mean there isn't an explanation. Just that I don't know it.

Of course there is an explanation. You just won't admit it. The answer is --- the Pakicetus is not the ancestor of the whale. But the implications of that put into jeopardy much of what has been touted as prima facie evidence of Darwinian evolution.

Yes, your Darwinian nonsense. First of all Darwin never cited the 'Darwin Finches' as proof of evolution. Second Darwin did a terrible job of examining them. Thirdly, an evolutionist in the 20th Century started the nonsense about the finches proving evolution. He said that they were separate species and had evolved. Being an evolutionist fraud, not a scientist, he was disproved in a famous book called "The Beak of the Finch". The finches do mate and produce progeny and the ones of 'mixed species' are much more viable than those that are not. In addition, it has also been shown that the finches's beaks have not evolved. They shorten and lengthen back and forth according to rainfall. Of course even though this research has been published in a Pulitzer Prize winning book, the evolutionists keep on lying about the finches being proof of evolution. They are the opposite, they disprove evolution.