If this statement is at all demonstrative of your ability to comprehend the English lanuage and argue effectually you will never make a good apologist for the philosophy of evolutionism.
Not only is there sufficient evidence all available evidence points . . .
Appently you also hold science in such low esteem that you place more faith in so-called piles of evidence than you do in direct observation and testability in the real world. Man, stay away from the science classroom.
And Leprechauns dancing for too long a period MAY cause earthquakes . . .
I suppose one may propose as much, but it would lack scientific credibility without direct observation and testing. Your creative example, however, serves as a reminder that you bear the marks of your Creator.
That's fine, it isn't my intent to be an "apologist" for the "philosophy" (sic) of evolution. Although if I wanted to, I'd make a better one than you do for ID.
Appently you also hold science in such low esteem that you place more faith
I talk facts and logic and all you do try to attack me personally by projecting emotions and ideas on me that you have no way of knowing I entertain. You must resort to this because you have no rational arguments of your own.
so-called piles of evidence
Poisoning the Well.
place more faith in so-called piles of evidence than you do in direct observation and testability in the real world.
Never said that either.
Man, stay away from the science classroom.
Oh, like the ID supporters who are trying to cram their non-science into school science classrooms? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
I suppose one may propose as much, but it would lack scientific credibility without direct observation and testing.
As does ID, which is impossible of direct observation or testing.