[Fichori]

Hey allmendream, by resorting to theatrics and ad hominem attacks, you effectively prove that you have lost the debate.

[allmendream]

Sure, sure. Calling GDan a Geocentricist isn't an ad homonym, it is a truth that he is proud of. Moreover it is directly relevant to this issue because once again he claims superior knowledge to the Scientists who he sources, who do not believe the same thing he does.

I trust your an objective observer, but did you notice that Gourmet Dan claims the paper he sourced that compared a gene sequence between species shows that mutations are not random, while simultaneously claiming it has nothing to do with mutation unless you assume a common ancestor, while rejecting the notion of a common ancestor?

So how does one accomplish such mental gymnastics?

Either these species shared a common ancestor or they didn't. Only if these species shared a common ancestor could the differences in the gene be a result of mutation. So how could this comparison show anything at all about mutation to someone who rejects common ancestry?

Care to take on this subject? Or is declaring GDan the winner all you've got?