Hi CTD

Let’s start from the top here. Russ T claimed that

Which is obviously false whichever way you look at it. Maybe I was wrong when I took evolution here to mean biological evolution as described in the theory of evolution. Natural selection does indeed occur after change (read here just mutation not evolution) but not after evolutionary change as described in ToE. Where you trying to confuse people here by referring to evolution in the non biological sense while trying to make it look like you were talking about biological evolution in which ToE describes in great detail how that change is lawful so evolution = change is actually false.

I’m guessing that Russ T won’t answer this so for the moment I’ll leave it to others here to try to fathom his motives or ignorance on this point.

Ok the thread continued from there
Russell2:- No Russ you have, yet again, misunderstood or misrepresented ToE. Evolution is the changes from generation to generation produced by the process of evolution.
CTD:-Typical evobabble. Change is the result of the process of change.
Note that I said ‘evolution’ and CTD translated that to ‘Change’. Now change is certainly what evolution is about but it’s not what biological evolution is. There’s lots of details he’s ignoring or ignorant off in making that substitution.

Now read through CTD’s last post and see if he has accurately represented what was said?

I particularly like this line “It is also funny that R2 demonstrates bait & switch so openly, for hope of such trivial gain.” Given that it was Russ T initially who accidentally or otherwise misused the term evolution to mean mutation then it was CTD who explicitly substituted the term evolution for the term change when ‘quoting’ my words.

Putting his own junk off on Russ T. R2 is the one who switched terms, not RT.
You’ll have to show me where I switched terms, it was Russ T who said “Evolution is the mathematical absurdity. Natural selection occurs after evolution”. Now how is he using the term evolution here? He’s not consistently using it in the correct sense. He’s not even using in the same sense both times within his own statement. Evolution in non biological systems simply means change and that can fit with his second use of the term though mutation would be a more correct term for biological systems but what did he mean the first time he used the term? Is he referring to change only in which case suggesting that change is mathematically absurd because change happens before natural selection is logically self contradictory or did he mean The Theory of Evolution the first time and something else, probably mutation, the second time. Russ T switched his own use of the term evolution within one statement. I’m beginning to suspect that he is not doing this purposefully, that he really is ignorant of the illogic of what he’s saying, I’d prefer that to the notion that he’s a purposeful liar anyway so until I have more information I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.

But I think we all can form a clear conclusion about what's going on...
I agree, Russ T can’t make a logical argument against ToE, he can’t even express his concerns about it in a logically consistent way and his bulldog, CTD, is going to chew on anyone’s leg who dares to point that out.

It is an attempt to profit while retreating from realistic definitions of 'evolution' and the "theory(ies)" they preach as fact.
The problem with this statement is that CTD does not get to make up the definition of the theory of evolution. He may not like it, he may think it’s wrong and he may, time and again define it differently to those who invented it and use it every day but until he actually shows that he understands it better than they I would have to suggest that he has no place doing so. If he wants to complain about straw men and call the Evolution, which seems to be his standard operating procedure, then that’s fine but it would be far less confusing if he’d be open about it and preferably give us a way to tell when he’s doing so. Maybe he should prefix evolution with CTD so we know it’s his straw man and not the scientific theory of evolution as defined by the scientists who actually created it. So how about you start talking about “CTDevolution” when you are doing this CTD and save the word Evolution for when you are talking about the real thing. I think that should help avoid so many of the problems here. So what do you all think, is CTD stupid, ignorant or out of date for failing to accept or even understand ‘ToE’ as it stands today? Or is he actually doing this on purpose?

In reason

Russell