[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

When you were "studying" the history and philosophy of science and came to the secondary literature on the 17th-century roots of mechanistic scientism, you took a wrong turn.

Checkmate.

[Coyoteman]

When you were "studying" the history and philosophy of science and came to the secondary literature on the 17th-century roots of mechanistic scientism, you took a wrong turn.

Checkmate.

As I thought. No specific scientific objections to the theory of evolution.

Care to try again? I suggest you try science this time, not religious fundamentalism.

Or, be brave and admit where your arguments are really coming from.

[omnivore]

When you were "studying" the history and philosophy of science and came to the secondary literature on the 17th-century roots of mechanistic scientism, you took a wrong turn.

Dislike for Enlightenment methods of inquiry into natural phenomena doesn't translate into a refutation of them. Or do you have actual evidence of the supernatural?

[burzum]

Another great response. You are really good at ignoring questions. And you declared checkmate! It is hard to lose when you invent the rules as you go!