[Natural Law]

"Debate on church doctrine and or threads on specific religious matters may be best posted in the religion forum, but the defense of religious freedom, especially against those who wish to deprive us of same belongs front and center on FR..."

I'm calling Bullsh!t. Would you care to explain how this posting is a defense of religious freedom and not a defense of specific church doctrine that Jim Robinson says belongs in the Religion Forum?

[editor-surveyor]

You neglected to ping jim to your assault on his policy.

[metmom]

Maybe you could explain how your post is a defense of the ToE and not an attack on GGG.

And while you’re at it, would YOU care to comment on the article and absurd speculations in it, like about 18 winged dragonflies for which there’s no evidence and yet is being used to bolster this guy’s theory.

And how a book with made up creatures, science fiction at the least, is considered by Shermer [who] wrote the foreword to Prothero’s book, calling it “the best book ever written on the subject.” In fact, “Don’s visual presentation of the fossil and genetic evidence for evolution is so unmistakably powerful that I venture to say that no one could read this book and still deny the reality of evolution.”

Sketches of imaginary creatures are the visual presentation that is “powerful”?

And evos mock creationists for believing *fairy tales* and the ramblings of bronze age goat herders? And this book is any better?