[BrandtMichaels]

I brought up Behe's book because the evolutionary explanantion(s) for macro-evolution just don't fit with the number of 'miracles' required. I'm sorry VadeRetro if you think I'm not allowed to reference a book if I don't agree with the author 100%.

Clearly, the advances in microbiology leave evolution wanting.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I brought up Behe's book because the evolutionary explanantion(s) for macro-evolution just don't fit with the number of 'miracles' required."

So it was indeed an evasion from your original claims about frauds. I see.

I didn't think you could defend your claims anyway, so my expectations were fulfilled.

[furball4paws]

As a practicing microbiologist with many years experience, I can assure you all recent advances (and old ones too from Pasteur on) fit quite firmly and comfortably within the framework of Evolution. If you have evidence to the contrary I'd love to hear it.

[VadeRetro]

My point is simply that you happily choose cafeteria-style from anybody anywhere saying anything you can use. Your "defense" is a mere assertion of this same observation as a right.

I gave you the problems with Behe's attack on evolution. He said there was no scenario under evolution at all by which certain things could evolve. That was laughably wrong and 55 years out of date. He said there was no research on molecular evolution. That too was already wrong when he wrote it in 1995. And so forth.

[RadioAstronomer]

Clearly, the advances in microbiology leave evolution wanting.

It is exactly opposite.

The evidence for evolution is so vast I am not sure I have enough time left in my life to read all of the existing literature. And more is being added daily.

There is vastly more evidence for evolution than say even gravity. I don't see many folks here refuting that existence of gravity even though it is a theory as well.