Replies

You may well have done 6 yrs grad work, and obtained a PHD CM. But what you produce with those works on these threads hardly counts or qualifies as ‘science’. The same can be said for the performances to the rest of the evo gang. BTW those flow chart's carry no more scientific weight than a exhibit depicting a supposedly 10 million year old ape-man based on a few shards bone and a jaw fragment.

It looks as to me and I guess to many another person, is that you have become a crusader for Darwinistic/evolutionist beliefs and are doing apologetics for those ideologies.

It all becomes a very sordid ordeal science has been soiled with. Science needs to cleanse itself and start doing science again, rather than being a facade for various socio-political-cultural causes & agendas.

Science is hardly apologetics. Why would we do apologetics when the data is on our side? It was not a conspiracy of dogma that enabled geologists to arrive at a consensus estimate of the age of the earth; but analysis of the same data.

The molecular and fossil evidence very much indicates common descent. No need to conform square data into a round peg when they all fit into nested hierarchies of interrelatedness.

Compare this to speed of light estimates of “Creation Scientists” who feed the number 6,000 into the equation and they stand back in awe as the speed of light goes to infinity some six thousand years ago. Yeah, that’s REAL Science. What a laugh.