You claim a ratio that you are not supporting from any scientific journals, papers or books. The Google results you provided only supplied either creationist sites that make the same claim as you or sites that are rebutting those creationist sites.
Is your lack of knowledge in this area so great that you must bluster and distract rather than answer a few simple questions?
Hi LinearAq!
I think, but admit I could be wrong, that CTD deliberately refrains from using scientific sources because he believes they are in error. If I understand his claims on this forum, he's basically implying (directly or otherwise) that:
a) the fields of science connected with evolution are fraudulant - and in order to come to this conclusion he must have:
b) proven to himself that he knows more than them, likely through decades of detailed research in these fields and is thereby capable of understanding their error and lies.
After all, one cannot prove that entire fields of science are false by just clicking on a mouse and visiting a few websites.
Just to make sure you're not misrepresenting yourself here, LinearAq, do you mean to imply that the above points (both a and b) do
not apply to CTD? For example, no one would claim that paleantology is all hocum unless they had spent years out in the field (and out of doors) studying these things and digging up bones, etc., for themselves. Are you trying to say this is not true of CTD?
