[donh]

d of course I didn't say it did. This was presented as a very simple example of a case where evolutionist and creationist approaches predict the same things in data. It is a common rhetorical device to construct a simple case on which both sides can agree and then use it as a springboard to address more complex questions.

Be that as it may, the scientific argument does not rest of "fish is older than folk". A "common rhetorical device" is irrelevant to the scientific argument, and the scientific arguement is the argument that supports evolutionary theory.

If evolutionary advocates so quickly jump to all kinds of conclusions not inherent in the discussion at hand, no progress is ever made in the discussions.

Well, we don't bank on progress in discussions, we bank on progress in scientific knowledge.

[PatrickHenry]

Placemarker