What I do is point out the duplicity of the ToE thought police like Gould and Dawkins. First the transitional record is not there. Then it is. Then its not. Then it is. It is a silly two step to justify there status as a scientist in the community at large. Never mind that their so-called research doesn't provide any meaningful productive contribution to society. It is simply another religion, only it requires more faith than most religions. And the thought police cannot stand the idea of having competition in the marketplace identifying and broadcasting the gaping holes in their theories.
Creationist Talking to Himself Placemarker
I doubt that Gould is policing anything much, and scientists are an argumentative bunch. If Dawkins were massively wrong then there'd be plenty of scientists shouting him down.
First the transitional record is not there.
That has been false for a long time. When Darwin was alive the entire fossil record was thin. Since then, not only have fossils been found that match the predictions of ToE again, and again, but many remarkable transitional sequences have been filled in. But feel free to wave away the avalanche of evidence presented on Ichneumon's home page.
Then it is.
true
Then its not.
False
Then it is.
It is a silly two step
Yes you are being quite silly
to justify there [sic] status as a scientist in the community at large. Never mind that their so-called research doesn't provide any meaningful productive contribution to society. It is simply another religion, only it requires more faith than most religions.
Yet another example of a creationist decrying science by calling it a religion. Curious that to call something a religion appears to be an insult. So, accepting for a moment your false contention that the theory of evolution is useless, what bearing does that have on its truth value?
And the thought police cannot stand the idea of having competition in the marketplace identifying and broadcasting the gaping holes in their theories.
Anytime you discover a competitive scientific theory to evolution, tell us about it, and we'll discuss it.
Anyway, to get back to the original theme of my post to you which you ignored, you were supporting Sauron, a self-professed IDer. Amongst the tenets of ID are the following (according to Michael Behe, the prominent scientific proponent of ID under oath in the Dover Trial):
* The earth is billions of years old
* Evolution is true
* All of life on earth shares common descent
* There is no evidence that God has intervened for millions of years
* The Designer may not still be around.
Which of those ID beliefs do you support?