re: “What is the implication of your statement, Jim?”
The majority of objectors to Darwin seem to be totally unknowledgeable when it comes to DNA, and instead insist on studying outward manifestation of traits of whatever is being ‘studied’, hence, “phrenology”.
>>Jim wrote: “The majority of objectors to Darwin seem to be totally unknowledgeable when it comes to DNA, and instead insist on studying outward manifestation of traits of whatever is being ‘studied’, hence, “phrenology”.”
Where did you get the notion that the major objectors to Darwin are unknowledgeable, Jim? From what I have read in the literature, all modern research of the genome contradicts the possibility of chance, as theorized by Darwin. In fact, I have not read a single paper that empirically supports evolution. Not one. Do you know of any?
Mr. Kalamata