[Antonello]

By what criteria should we be allowed to dismiss assertions, if not by lack of evidence?

Or are you really saying that faulty opinions should be accepted by fiat if there are a lot of them?

Oh, and to bring this back to the origin of our discussion, regarding your claim: 'No I doubt. I don't believe the crap I read in Science Journals, they won't print what scientists report who don't go along with their one way evolution ideas.

Number of evidence-backed cases I have cited to dispute this = 1
Number of evidence-backed cases you have cited to support this = 0

You dismissed out of hand an argument supported by evidence against your wild claim, yet accuse me of unfairly dismissing arguments that are not backed with evidence. You are what you accuse me of being.

[nicmarlo]

You dismissed out of hand an argument supported by evidence against your wild claim

It wasn't a wild claim; Science Journals do refuse to print science/studies which do not conform to their agenda. And what you posted earlier on grass has nothing to do with changing any fundamental agenda with evolution/theory, it alters only dates as to when they BELIEVE grass grew. Obviously, what they BELIEVED before was incorrect.

My opinion remains unaltered as to the preposterous likelihood that out of thousands of posts in FR, none (I didn't say all) have been credible by evolutionarians.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

You have to understand, he is afraid to back up his statements. Why should he have to? Isn't it enough that he made them? How dare we take him to task and ask him to put up or shut up? He can't argue the science and takes it as an insult when asked to defend his claims. In fact, he says he hasn't really made any claims to begin with. lol How brave of him.