| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
Posted on 04/04/2002 10:05:32 AM PST by Heartlander
I should ask the same of you. You have a self-admitted track record.
| To: PatrickHenry So, if I'm nasty to somebody, will this thread get pulled like the last three? How about if I page Nebullis? |
I'm really holding my breath.
That sounds like a "wildly elliptical" thing to say, coming from you...
It isn't even as if Chuck Darwin were the black sheep of his family; his whole family was nothing but a flock of black sheep.
It isn't really Siberia, it's only "Religion." OK, more people go to Siberia.
That's what I'm getting at. The point cited is a minor part of the article. -you-
Hate to disagree with you on this point, however, there was a point in the author of the article pointing to the interbreeding of these animals. It shows some important points:
1. speciation is not as the evolutionists claim, specifically, long periods of isolation of two groups do not result in sufficient genetic change to prevent interbreeding.
2. genetic change is very slow if it occurs at all. This ties with the conclusion on the finches that while there were phenotype changes occurring in these finches in a very short time, these changes wavered back and forth, a disproof of evolution.
3. evolutionists have claimed that these finches are different species. The author is showing that isolation does not prove speciation. In fact, during this research, some of the so-called different species were seen interbreeding and producing mixed young that could also breed.
The whole article is a very strong disproof of evolution and that is why the evolutionists here do not wish to talk about it and have been avoiding discussion of it since the thread started.
I'm worried about my two cats. I sometimes leave a computer on for them to surf the web and lurk on FR and what not while I'm out...
Post 908 deleted by the Moderator. (Skipping a few steps.)
Oh my! What if they converted to Darwinism while you were away by reading these threads?
No, it was not me that removed the threads - it was you and your friends who by turning the discussion into a sewer forced the moderators of this forum to put them away where only those already involved could see it. You folk have been warned of abuse numerous times by the management and continue to indulge in abusive behavior. You are clearly knowingly abusing these forums provided for discussion by turning them into a sewer of insults.
Cats have more sense than that.
Have you apologized to the people on this thread you INSULTED with your "wildly elliptical" nonsense?
Moderators don't sit around reading crevo threads. You abuse the abuse button as a way to run and hide at the same time. The resulting thread, you hope, has your blue screeds proclaiming how no one ever answers you on this or that, and all the one-time answers reading "Post nnn removed by the Moderator."
The removal of post 229 was particularly a joke. 229 was a response to your "Earth to Vade the proven liar."
You have the nerve to call me a liar and remove the post in which I show that the "lie" was your own inablility to understand data inconvenient to you. I repeat: you're a coward.
I have been. That is why it is now comical observing the ways in which you confirm my assessment of you.
Indeed. Why would they want to evolve since they can lounge around the house all day and still get fed. :-)
You might help is stopping future pulls by advising your evolutionist friends to stay away from abusive behavior.
There was about a year of joking about PatrickHenry being "kindler and gentler" after that. He was, actually.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.