[Sonny M]

I don't think Darwain was utterly hopelessly wrong, just not right on everything. Its not his fault, he made mistakes. If you think everything, cover to cover, letter to letter is a fact, then, I'm sorry. Several of his ideas hold water, but attempts to duplicate or reproduce his theories have not, in general, been successfull. There is no doubt there are holes in the theory, strong scientists, who believe in the theory admit as much, not just because they are looking for a grant, but because they want to close the holes. If the whole thing, was absolutley true, then we could close the book on further research, and end it all, and call this "theory" a fact, something, it, is by defintion, not.

[PatrickHenry]

If you think everything, cover to cover, letter to letter is a fact, then, I'm sorry.

That's not what I said. I quoted *you* and said that *you* were hopelessly wrong. For example, you said some of Darwin's evidence was faked. I think that's serious enough that it should be well-documented, and you should have no trouble backing it up. Can you?

[whattajoke]

Before stating erroneous things like your ideas about what is theory and what is fact, and how science works as a whole, please learn to spell the man's name correctly:

D-A-R-W-I-N.

I don't usually call attention to spelling errors, for I have many myself, but your repeated misspelling of Darwin's name, despite the fact it's on this board a hundred times, does not bode well for your empty rhetoric supposedly calling evolution into question.

[js1138]

I don't think Darwain was utterly hopelessly wrong, just not right on everything. Its not his fault, he made mistakes.

You will, of course, enlighten us as to the details of Darwin's mistakes, or failing that, give us a ration reason for believing that he made mistakes. (I do accept that anyone who spends a lifetime recording observations will make errors -- I'd just like to know if you've compiled a list of Darwin's errors of observation.)

Or perhaps you aren't referring to details, but rather to some conceptual error. So what would that be?