Earlier though, I was "in a parallel universe," because you dismissed out of hand the possibility of its existence.
Ahem -- do not be disingenuous. He did not suggest that *you* were "in a parallel universe" (actually he said "alternate", but no matter), he suggested that your alleged evidence must be from an alternate universe, for the very good reason that no evidence OF THE KIND YOU DESCRIBED is known. So if you had some, it must have been beamed in from some reality other than the current one.
And note that he wasn't taking issue with your claim that "considerable genetic differentiation between humans and other primates have been found". That would be an unamazing finding. However, you didn't stop there. You claimed that, "It has been found to such an extent that the smooth evolution theories have been problematized."
*THAT* is the claim which richly earned you an, "oh yeah?" attitude in response, because a) if such a finding had actually been found, it would already be very big news, impossible to miss by anyone who follows science news, and b) those of us who have been following the chimp/human genome projects *know* that the detailed analysis of the genetic differences between the species has not turned up any findings of the sort you describe.
So in short, we knew that you were making a claim you couldn't support, or vastly exaggerating something you did have.
Thus, the response you got. EVEN SO, you'll note that he was openminded enough to ask to see what you had anyway.
So again, you might want to drop the drama queen stuff, like when you use this minor example of eye-rolling as if it's some kind of keelhauling, and justifies comments of yours like:
This is how evolution proponents argue. It is wrong. And it does more to discredit evolution than any gap in the so called record.
Uh huh. Sure. You get treated with humorous skepticism for making an overblown claim we know is false, and suddenly it "discredits evolution" and is "wrong" and is "how evolution proponents argue".
Sheesh.
I think you are arriving late to this discussion.
I posted a link of scientific evidence differentiating primates and humans. No one debunked it. The link is still out there in this thread with excerpts from the article. So have a look into the "alternate universe." Get back to me once you have.
Moreover, I sustained the point that the desire to see humans and apes as similar obstructs scientific views of the differences. This is why it is important not to approach science with an agenda or axe to grind.
The entire humiliation theme indicated toward ID scientists is ridiculous.