In fact, I'm not. Science covers the field of things which can be observed and explained via repeatable tests. The concept of micro-evolution is well within the purview of science, as we can and have observed small changes in populations based on environmental conditions, and we have established many repeatable tests of such phenomena.
Macro-evolution (what I call evolutionism), on the other hand, has never been scientifically observed, explained, tested, or anything of the sort. It is an attempt at creating a fanciful story of how things came to be by extrapolating back from what we see now in entirely unrigorous, untestable, unobservable ways. It fits much more squarely in the category of History, Mythology, and indeed Theology (aTheology?) than "Science".
In fact, I'm not. Science covers the field of things which can be observed and explained via repeatable tests. The concept of micro-evolution is well within the purview of science, as we can and have observed small changes in populations based on environmental conditions, and we have established many repeatable tests of such phenomena.
Macro-evolution (what I call evolutionism), on the other hand, has never been scientifically observed, explained, tested, or anything of the sort. It is an attempt at creating a fanciful story of how things came to be by extrapolating back from what we see now in entirely unrigorous, untestable, unobservable ways. It fits much more squarely in the category of History, Mythology, and indeed Theology (aTheology?) than "Science".
[flagged]
Any argument would make for a much better argument than your deranged repetitions.
I've claimed X doesn't exist, all you have to do is demonstrate it does for you to "win". It should be very easy, given how confident you seem.
2 replies →