All hail the almighty god of evolution. Able to eliminate genetic traits that lead to 'anti-survival behavior' as well as produce them in the first place. All conveniently available on-demand as required for the next 'just so' story. There truly is nothing that evolution can't do.
Well, except that it doesn't seem to be able to stop adherents from constantly begging the question and engaging in the most ridiculous logical fallacies offered as apologetics.
Well, except that it doesn't seem to be able to stop adherents from constantly begging the question and engaging in the most ridiculous logical fallacies offered as apologetics.
Ah, I see, trying to be sarcastic as a means of attempting to discredit something of which you have no understanding nor desire to understand. Yet, despite your comment being a poor attempt at sarcasm, it does highlight the beauty and robustness of the theory of evolution. The ToE can be considered the framework of modern biology. Its suitability as both an explanatory framework and predictive tool underscores just how useful and robust that theory is. A theory that didn't actual explain or predict anything would be useless, and would not, by definition, be a theory.
Of course I did not expound on the many observations and conclusions I have made concerning the abortion industry, its clients, the documented deleterious effects of abortion on future (live) child-bearing, etc. But I used those facts to make a logical deduction (another concept you have shown difficulty with) about the future consequences of the widespread use of abortion as birth control, which I stated in those two sentences.
If you like, I could discuss in detail exactly what my considerations were in making that evolutionary prediction vis-à-vis abortion. But that would be a VERY long post, and is not really pertinent to the topic of this thread, which is about some non-science-trained artist's unscientific representations of one of our close ancestors.
Disclaimer: I do not know that the person I made that comment to was specifically thinking of abortion in their original comment. My response to them was about abortion, which I did not specifically state.