|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
Master Elite Member
|
Due to the absolute absence of fishbabies, chickenbabies, etc. such nonsense could never have honestly fooled many people at all - unless they wanted to be fooled. Right, oh willing one? Hi CTD, Again with the accusations that evolutionists are foolish or stupid. Looks like you are just trying to egg me on with the blatant accusation that I want to be fooled. Typical of your tactics. The idea that, even if Hackel's hypothesis had merit, there should be chicken and fish babies in human miscarriages is the height of creationist foolishness. I don't think it is "creationist foolishness" at all. If Häckel & co. claim the baby becomes successively different animals, how does one reconcile the failure of these animals to turn up when pregnancies go wrong? Not just human pregnancies - all mammals were thought to pass through stages. But no dog's ever produced a fish. How obvious is that!? Did this just "slip by" without notice, or did people "let it slide" due to a desire to believe the untrue? Or is it a case of "everything's okay now that we know better"? A blunder like that is inexcusable. It's not okay. If it was accepted, it could only be accepted by idiots and liars. Have you evidence that says otherwise?
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
