If the 'truth is told' about supersport's participation on evolutionist forums, the results are very bad for SS.
One example from RDFF was supersport's "2 scientific challenges for evolutionists", basically a call for evidence that evidence that mutations can create a new, or beneficially modify an existing, structure.
Among the many replies were the examples of mutations in the lymphocytes of the immune system, which produce countless variations of antibody (by mutation), and respond to the environmental stimulus of a match to an antigen by rapid division, with yet more mutation in the antibody genes creating ever closer matchs.
This is, of course, exactly what he demanded.
So, equally of course, he ignores it completely and claims that no-one has been able to provide any evidence for beneficial mutation.
Contrary to what he claims in the above post, it is supersport that does not tolerate ideas. Evidence he does not like becomes 'non-evidence', arguments he did not win 'never happened', and if he just repeats the lie until there is no-one bothered to refute him again, it must be the truth.
Supersport accuses the forums of communistism and mind control, but the erasing of inconvenient facts and history and the argument ad nauseam technique of endlessly repeating the big lie is all to be found on his side.
Finally, supersport may have been banned from several forums for his behaviour, but as far as I can see none of his posts have been deleted. Far from suppressing his ideas, they - and the criticism of them -remain on view. If any single point he had made was at all valid, would the Global Order of Darwinists of his imagination allow them to remain?
