[Dan Day]

Now that we've filtered through some of the initial flotsam, distractions, red herrings, straw men, and sophomoric logical errors, I believe that it's time that you truthfully address Post #557.

Ok, I'll take a stab at "truthfully addressing post #557": It's a giant load of nonsense.

It, again, performs the classic Creationist fallacy of challenging someone to explain a hypothetical "single step" process which, sadly, bears no real resemblance to any evolutionary claim or process.

It's like asking the odds of a land-dwelling mammal giving birth to a whale in a single reproductive act. The answer is, "well I have to admit that's pretty f***ing unlikely, but since that's not what evolution claims happened, or how, what on earth are you babbling on about?"

[Southack]

"Ok, I'll take a stab at "truthfully addressing post #557": It's a giant load of nonsense. It, again, performs the classic Creationist fallacy of challenging someone to explain a hypothetical "single step" process which, sadly, bears no real resemblance to any evolutionary claim or process." - Dan DAy

Sigh. Actually, Post 557 is a post that uses a cryptography analogy to illustrate why an earlier claim that DOS had multiple paths to Windows was in error.