You never explained why you thought it was invalid,You missed it.
- I rejected it as a "valid" use of the experimental results.
- Politely, that is the difference between a Darwinian and a non-Darwinian, ontogeny repeating phylogeny as a premise.
To which I pointed out that a valid argument may have false premises and a true conclusion. Do you really wish to rehash this all again? "Who's on first?" might be more entertaining to the lurkers, after all...