“I'd be willing to bet that your "mountains of evidence from (paleontology, comparative anatomy, geology, and molecular biology)" is just so much question-begging.”
Yeah, totally made-up question-begging that all works together. Kinda weird, that. Just watch the current administration. They come up with a lie, people poke holes in it, they lie a little different, people poke holes in that, eventually their lies contradict their first lying statements. Nothing holds together.
the ‘mountains of evidence’ you dismiss ARE mountains, they’re considered evidence of a single scientific idea exactly because no one’s actually poked a realistic hole in it.
Look at you? You can’t point to any single thing and show ‘this is incorrect because’ and then demonstrate better science. You just dismiss the entire thing as a lie.
Kinda desperate, really.
“The fact of micro-evolution (which was well known via breeding of domestic animals before anyone had heard of Darwin) does not prove macro-evolution.”
Dude, they’re the same thing. They really are.
Micro-evolution is small changes to the organism, which accumulate into BIG physical changes in the organism. We don’t have to prove it, YOU have to show there’s any upper limit to micro to prevent it from producing macro.
"Your hand-waving is not evidence of anything.”
You saying so isn’t actually disproving anything, either.
“Your sloppy, illogical reasoning is clear to everyone outside your cult.”
Then you can show a specific error?
“ It goes back to Darwin, in fact, probably the most muddle-headed (alleged) scientist ever to have lived.”
Ad hominem attacks on Darwin do not detract from the science that has held up to scrutiny for well over 100 years.
“ Until you can master elementary logical reasoning, you should give up any ambition scientific theorizing.”
I notice that ‘logic’ isn’t one of the evidences you list in the opening. Why are you attacking that and not, say, paleontology?
