Hey Russ, thanks again for responding. Maybe we can get down to the problem you are having with the concept of evolution.

Quote
Biological Warfare: Experiments On the American People
(The evolutionists says: Hey, they're just apes, so what's really wrong with it?)

The Government Always Tells the Truth
(depends on who's listening)

The New Order of Barbarians
(or just a new order)
I notice that this has nothing to do with (a) the topic “The cost of Evolution, and other things” that supposedly discusses the killing of people due to the teaching of evolution (although the original poster seems confused about this), or (b) what is meant by the term “evolution” on this thread. So far SoSick has not supplied us with her version, her understanding of what evolution involves.

We also discussed the issue of what definition should be earlier, and I thought you were going to provide something more than your “slogan” version of “rock-to-cell” and “cell-to-human,” which I noted previously is not a definition of evolution but a (cliff-notes version of the) natural history of (part of) the diversity of life we know about on earth.
  • It is not a process that can be applied to actually studying biology.
  • It is not a theory that can be used to make predictions about biology.
  • It is not a description of the science of studying the full diversity of life we know about on earth, from the natural history, to modern scientific studies, to the theory of evolution (ToE), the facts that show evolution has occurred and the testing of the theory(ies).

So do you have anything more to add, or are we at the point where we have identified that you do not have a working definition of evolution? One that we can test for validity and reality.

Once we have that definition that matches what is used in science then we can test it with your slogan to see if it is valid as well.

Enjoy.

ps - all responders please note, from my first post here: [color:"red"]“I'm new here, so you will forgive me if I only post on a few threads, and only reply to the first response to my post[/color] (if you feel you have an important point that is not covered you can reply to a later post).” This is my policy to prevent pile-ups, in case of having a number of people making responses, and if you point is important we will get to it, but if it isn't then don't waste other people's posts that may be important. Thanks for your consideration.