Replies

I’m done- I’m sure this thread will devolve into more bliand and ignorant statements in defense of the dying MacroEvolutionary hypothesis, and I’m sure more disingenious blatant scientifically ignorant misrepresentations will fill the pages to come- Have at it- The articles and the refutations of the blatant lies presented by PBS are there for you to either read or completely ignore per usual. do what ya want. If ya’ll wish to defend a seriously flawed biologically impossible Macroevolutionary hypothesis by presenting nothing more thna scientifically ignorant ad hominem attacks and outrighht blatant misrepresentations- then I suppose you have the right to your opinion. But it is non the less quite telling when you have to do so. If that’s the best ‘scienctific’ arguments you can present, then I guess it just goes to hsow how htreadbare the hypothesis of Macroevolution really is. But I’m sure some will defend it to the death with nothing but empty scientifically stunted accusations. The fact is that Miller got his but handed to him on a silver platter during hte trial, but amazingly, The bias of the judge and the influence of the ACLU were such that their objectivity was thrown completely out hte window during the ‘trial’. It was like the three monkeys who could hear see or speak no evil- Evidence? What evidence? We didn’t see any evidence- Criminey. Perhaps one day the judge monkey with his hands over his eyes will wil lremove them and see the facts objectively instead of with complete bias. but until then, I’m sure we’ll all have to endure copious amounts of bias and blatant misrepresentations ad nauseum