[Lexinom]

While the evolutionists on the thread are correct to refute "guilt-by-association", Nazi policies in the 30's and 40's are a very logical unpacking of Darwinian doctrine consistently applied.

[Coyoteman]

While the evolutionists on the thread are correct to refute "guilt-by-association", Nazi policies in the 30's and 40's are a very logical unpacking of Darwinian doctrine consistently applied.

Its "guilt-by-association," but you agree with it.

Anti-evolutionists can't refute "Darwinism" on its own merits, so they have to restort to "guilt-by-association"?

Lets get back to the real issue; how do you refute this?

---

Fossil: Sts 5

Site: Sterkfontein Cave, South Africa (1)

Discovered By: R. Broom & J. Robinson 1947 (1)

Estimated Age of Fossil: 2.5 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, floral & faunal data (1, 4)

Species Name: Australopithecus africanus (1, 2)

Gender: Male (based on CAT scan of wisdom teeth roots) (1, 30) Female (original interpretation) (4)

Cranial Capacity: 485 cc (2, 4)

Information: No tools found in same layer (4)

Interpretation: Erect posture (based on forward facing foramen magnum) (8)

Nickname: Mrs. Ples (1)

See original source for notes:
http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=24

[King Prout]

actually, it isn't so much "guilt by association" as it is a case of "argument from adverse consequences"

and a rather weak example of that particular fallacy, to boot.