It's an entirely rational argument. It just isn't convenient for you to your misfortune. FR exists. Postings on FR exist. That I am not concerned with, but you could be anything - a bot, random traffic, a posting error producing a random response that just happens to fit the discussion by chance. I mean let's face it, the odds of that are far lower than a single mutation causing a single celled critter to become a fish, let alone a bunch of mutations causeing a bunch of different critters leading up to the fish. Your responses, whatever you are, could all be explained by random modem garbage trapped in memory somewhere and dumped by chance continually and erroneously into the posting mechanism by a fault in the software. The probability is higher for that to be happening right now than for any one of your theories of evolution. I'm just playing the odds game and arguing the obvious for any person with a basic understanding of logic and first year grasp of Copi. You're backpeddling.
No, that isn't. That's why what you presented was a "faulty analogy".
faulty, no, inconvenient - yes. That was an rhetorical invocation of irony. I don't believe in you, thusly we can't be having this conversation. I'm actually responding to computer trash dumped errantly into a buffer. The person assumed behind the label is a myth. So, I can sit here and trash that label, it's mythical family, etc and it doesn't matter because the label is all that exists as a figment of our imagination collectively to explain the posted responses. I can rationalize you with understanding of known systems to explain you away in any number of ways. All of them logical - we can't be bothered with plausablility - we're talking theory, and if you can't throw the highly improbable out the window in discussing theory, you're a quack, right. DNA, RNA systems in the human body have built in mechanisms to gaurd against mutation - any mutation, much less a beneficial one - or better a beneficial one that can be inherited. Your evolution theory requires far more leaps of faith and willfull ignoring of rationality than my understanding of God does.
In other words, the fact that you are wrong doesn't change your proclamation that you are right.
I wasn't wrong, much less factually wrong. You leapt to a conclusion apparently based on an errant assumption and got it wrong. And in common fashion, you still can't admit your error of assumption and are blaming me for your foul up. At the same time, it must be noted that your understanding of the subject at hand is as much tied to your ability to deal with assumptions. Kinda scary.
You assert absolute knowledge that you are right and that anyone who disagrees
How rude of the Wright brothers, huh! Darn them two, the rest of human civilization has to be right because they have different opinions. Where else but here is such faulty, inexcuseable logic considered useful? It works nowhere else if for no other reason than the laws of logic and chance alone; but, you swing it like it matters. Franklin is a Dork because he discovered electricity instead of just having the same theory about it as everyone else. What a judgemental, knowitall jerk, huh. How about Galileo, was right on the money while most of the rest of the world was wrong - what a quack, right. But screw him, he's inconvenient to the moment. All of human history is full of heretics that are proven right in the end but who ultimately stood alone as quacks and were explained away as such till it became unfashionable to deny the obvious anylonger. I'm not sure, but you seem now more galled at my confidence than at my belief. I'm not. But you haven't seen what I have either. That's not my problem. My faith grew out of my access to the Bible and my willingness to test it. I've been convinced by tangibles resulting from that exploration - not a pile of theories of what might be if it were all true. I rest easy at night with solid proof in my mind. You sleep with theories and denounce those confident in the facts as quacks. In Galileo's time, you'd have called him a nut, quack or heretic along with everyone else. Today you have the benefit of hindsight and long held proofs. My mathmatical proofs are scripture which I doubt you've read or at least read with any seriousness. Never too late and I invite you to do so. But don't condemn from ignorance or vanity what you cannot explain for yourself.
To me, that's the height of arrogance.
Funny, that's why the pope jailed Galileo in his own home. Are you Catholic by chance and just pulling my leg? Galileo was so arrogant as to challenge the Church with the truth and therefore the athority of the Pope. In the end, Rome had to apologize over Galileo hoping to save face if memory serves. Truth is arrogant to anyone who benifits from ignorance of it. Too bad.