This would be of a different sort of fallacious logic than your own fallacy of equivocation, then? "Evolution", anyone?
please explain my "fallacy of equivocation" or is this just a baseless attack (stab in the dark)
The reality is my tormenters are applying the “fallacy of equivocation” basically they are saying “Biological Darwinist evolution is evolution therefore all evolution is biological Darwinist evolution”
I guess some of you people never tire of being skewered by your own statements.
HINT: if you plan on attacking a position, you better provide supporting evidence or your attack could be turned back on you.