I couldn't resist coming back. I so enjoy being called a moron you know! LOL
You are not a moron. Insane perhaps, but not a moron.
First, I must make a correction for a mistype earlier. I stated that my engineering husband of 17 years has come to the conclusion that logic is the only way to understand anything. What I meant to type was that he has learned that logic is NOT the only way to look at information. Often, logical analysis can be quite a barrier as the world is made up of many things that we can't see. Love, wind, etc.
But we can investigate these insubstantial things by inductive and deductive logic. If they are not manifest there is probably no reason to assume they are real. Real things usually manifest themselves.
The foundational question is 'Where did it all begin?' If you can't answer this, you have no foundation on which to build. If I tell you a printer just popped up on the beach, fully functioning, you're going to know that someone designed that puppy. It didn't materialize out of seaweed and whale poop now did it!?
Consider mathematics. We make a number of assumptions: If A=B then B=A. If A=B and B=C, then A=C, ... things that seem kind of obvious, and from these we deduce by kind of obvious rules things that are not so obvious, like e^(ix) = cos x + i * sin x. We started by assuming statements and rules, but guess what? It works! It corresponds to the real world! We can build computers and plot trajectories that take our rockets on photographic missions to other worlds, and cure all sorts of diseases,...
Of course we can make other sorts of assumptions. We can assume that there is a magic man in the sky and that if we beg or wail or dance or tear our clothing or kill our first-born children he will make the plague go away. Guess what? It doesn't work, and so it seems we are justified in discarding those assumptions and those methods.
Of course we could be wrong, but at least until we are shown to be wrong we are probably better off depending on those assumptions and methods that give good results, or until we can discover assumptions and methods that give better results.
Second, SHOW ME!!!! Show me just one species that is alive today for which you have the previous iterations full fossil remains where it turns from one species into the next.
That is known as the missing link fallacy. I show you a fossil, species B, that is temporally and morphologically intermediate between species A and species C and you require two more fossils between A and B, and B and C. What you are demanding is that we show you every single generation tens of thousands or even millions of them. But fossilization is very rare.
Nevertheless, we have very complete fossil records of some transitions.
Not drawings, hard, real material. All I've ever seen, and what Thaumatergy offered in his link to 29 proofs are drawings. That is NOT hard proof. How can you possibly say it is?
If you want to see hard proof, not pictures, you are going to have to go to museums of natural history and gain access to their reference collections. Don't expect them to ship them to you and do expect that they are going to require you to demonstrate that you can handle those collections with care. The best way to demonstrate that, unfortunately for you, is extensive study under qualified teachers to learn not only how to handle the specimens but how to understand what you are seeing.
If I bring you some green slime and say it came from a martian, you're gonna ask to see that martian.
No, you got it wrong. The first thing I am going to do is try to analyze that slime. If it turns out to have the chemical composition, odor, and other characteristics of lime gelatin, then I am going to find your claim hard to believe. If analysis shows that it's composition is unknown, and unlike anything ever observed before, we may entertain the possibility it is Martian poop.
By the way, if every single fossil in the world were to disappear, the evidence for evolution would still be overwhelming. It comes from biochemistry, embryology, developmental biology, genetics, and biogeography. We have seen evolution in the laboratory and in the field. A hundred and fifty years after Darwin, his theory is stronger than ever.
If I can't produce it then you're gonna debunk it. Show me. Not just a bunch of high sounding words that amount to nothing, show me the physical proof. Every bit of 'proof' I've ever seen in any book consists of drawings. Or one picture of one thing. These things require great detail to prove.
Those long high sounding words may mean nothing to you, but they have very clear definitions, very precise definitions, so that ambiguity is minimized. Those definitions have to be precise. Did you know that people used to be killed because they held to the doctrine of homoiusion instead of the "correct" doctrine of homousion?
You have to study the vocabulary and the structures and processes to which it applies, before you can make sense of them. You are probably not going to gain that understanding because you know in your heart that some ancient Palestinian who spoke a language you don't understand, and whose world-view was totally alien to you, and who is long dead, loves you. You may understand it for that reason, but I am willing to bet that is an assumption that will not stand the test.
You have to be willing to put in the time and effort.
What I have attempted to show you is that you are ignorant. Ignorance is usually not a crime, though it can get you killed. You are not necessarily stupid, though it well may be you are incapable of understanding the material you demand, or maybe you are just too lazy to do the work, or perhaps you really don't care enough to take the trouble.
To expect us to respect your opinions if you are stupid, or lazy, especially if you continue to spout nonsense, would indeed be moronic. You are not a moron, so don't act like one.
In any case, half of all people are below average in intelligence, and it is no more to the credit of those in the top ten percent that they are what they are than it is to the discredit of those in the bottom ten percent that they are as they are.
I have probably dealt professionally with more morons, imbeciles, and idiots that you have and liked most of them.
Now... Have you any specific questions about evolution, the philosophy of science or how science operates?
