And then they'll take the dictionary and see the meaning of Darwinism. It's that simple.
From wikipedia: "In the United States, the term "Darwinism" is often used by creationists as a pejorative term"
"it is increasingly regarded as an inappropriate description of modern evolutionary theory."
You've been reported for your continue use of the word in a demeaning and insulting way.
It was built by intelligence. Do you have anything? What about Darwinism? Are you done with that?
I said I agreed. I also said your comparison to anything living is absolutely nonsense. Drop the example because it isn't doing anything for your case.
Remember that time I said if you wanted to quote any information on evolution to use Wikipedia, because it has an extremely well-sourced, unbiased and accurate article? All this does is show you still hold to the ludicrous and creationist fabricated view that some kind of 'universal theory of evolution' exists. It does not, and insinuating so is just another insult to your intelligence.
Call it whatever you want. Call them the Egyptians of the gaps and say "theegyptiansdidit". It doesnt change anything.
Not need for them to fill a gap, for they were very clearly the designers and builders of the pyramids. We have indisputable evidence that this is true.
So I take it you're not here to refute the intelligent design of man but you want me to pretend-debate your non-refutation without Darwinism.
I need not refute something which hasn't been put forward as a legitimate theory. It's not science, and has no supporting evidence, therefore it is your job to show me something to refute, not my job to refute something you hold true.
The problem is not design of man. The problem is your materialistic inclinations. It didn't have to be even more spectacular. It's not some mystery. It's only the tip of the iceberg. You start to take the human system for granted and you forget the piece of technology you're dealing with.
Ad Hominem attacks are not appreciated here, pal. Ether we have a civilized discussion where you present to me your ID hypothesis and the evidence to support it, and I refute it, or we don't. That's the only way this will go.
Yes and the great pyramid is designed."theEgyptiandidit". The Thor argument is irrelevant in light of an adequate understanding of theological concepts. What exactly is your point here?
Can your hypothesis make predictions? Can it provide useful insights? Can it do anything other than stifle scientific progress? Your pyramid analogy is useless and does not apply to the situation, why? Because by your logic, as we are made in gods image, and thus he is our image, he too must have a designer. You can't just propose an intelligence and then with special pleading claim that
your intelligence doesn't need a designer, but human intelligence does. Your concept is absurd and simple goes into an infinite regression.
I asked you for evidence that chance can build the human system, not what you think is poor design. There is no light when you get into certain sections of the great pyramid did you know that? Even if one finds what they would classify as poor design it doesn't mean that it can be built by chance.
Here you go. I have presented to you 29+ evidences for Macroevolution/common descent. Now, I expect a full refutation using reputable sources of every claim made in that article. Good luck.
(
If you need something a bit easier to digest here's the extremely long and well sourced wikipedia article on Common Descent.)
So, when can I expect your full refutation of every claim? (If you fail to refute one of them I'm right and you're wrong by your logic. I'll expect your apology and acceptance of evolution in a could days or weeks)
"
