Why? Because I won't conflate evolution and abiogenesis? At worst it's dishonest. At best it's just downright lazy.
Science are hard. Dogma is easy.
Right - so how come evolution believers simply move the goal posts everytime some fact comes along to disprove another major piece of evolution?
For instance, when Mary Schwitzer found soft tissue in a T-Rex the evolution followers simply said there must be something we don’t understand about the decay rates.
No other branch of science has nearly as much fraud nor moving of the goal-posts - priceless!
****Why? Because I won’t conflate evolution and abiogenesis? At worst it’s dishonest. At best it’s just downright lazy.****
It’s not the least bit dishonest..... and I guarantee you that I am not lazy when it comes to researching this.
*****Science are hard. Dogma is easy.*****
Never has there been a more unfounded dogma than the theory of evolution. It is not science, it is philosophy built upon conjecture on top of assumptions and grounded in faith.
Cambrian Explosion ..... Ignore it.
Law of Biogenesis...... Ignore it.
Law of Causality, Law of the Conservation of Matter, 1st Law of Thermo...... Ignore, Ignore, Ignore.
2nd Law of Thermo..... Twist
Transitional Fossils.....can’t find em.... better come up with something ..... ahh!!!! Punctuated Equilibrium.
Evidence that may support the opposing view? Ridicule, invective, shun.
Refuse to peer-review their papers and then call them nonsense because they’ve not been peer-reviewed.
Yeah..... I know how it all works.