I am not pleased to note that there are some Christian creationists who are predisposed to gullibility, or underestimate the fanatical dedication of the enemy - or both. The mask is off, people, if you read and pay careful attention. Thinking otherwise merely because you don't want to believe moles exist is no better than believing anything else simply because you want to believe it. Desire generally needs to be excluded from evaluations.
Indeed, Todd is making it hard for you to maintain your delusion even if you want to. He has now decided to arrogantly talk down to real men-of-science quite directly.
I just flipped through the latest Acts & Facts (March 2010).
Oh my.
Let's go over some basics on transposable elements and their relationship to the argument for evolution, specifically the common ancestry of humans and chimpanzees.
I read his blibber-blabber, and the Acts & Facts article on transposable elements.
http://www.icr.org/article/5177/Now I have some basics to go over. Assertions don't mean diddly. Brian Thomas says there are functions for transposable elements and presents specific examples. The arrogant one simply asserts that they don't really have any function. Assertions don't mean diddly. Assertions don't mean diddly. Assertions don't mean diddly. Got that
basic?
Truly pathetic, and inexcusable for anyone claiming to be an informed participant. We know from over 100 years of "vestigial organ" lies that ignorance is not a sound basis for conclusions. Not knowing what something does does not mean it does nothing.
Another basic: Similarity does not prove biological relationships. "Homology" is broken everywhere one looks. It has never worked as a scientific system of evaluation at any point in history - not for one single minute. There can be no "powerful" evidence from "homology" of any type until someone invents a rule that corresponds to the real world.
These are very fundamental issues, things even a dabbler knows.
Even his evo-buddies must blush if they consider his lame attempt to belittle Mr. Thomas. He presents neither actual fact or sound reasoning which would lead anyone to doubt a single thing Mr. Thomas said. He appeals entirely to emotion, since his "opposition" consists of nothing but substanceless smoke.
Go ahead little boy, talk down to your betters some more. See how long the erroneously "charitable" will continue to be fooled by your act.
