Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No, just try to learn if you want to oppose something.You want I should become a scientist?
LOL
So why are you arguing against it here?I don't oppose evolution...
I've said that I don't understand how it could be possible. If it's discovered next week that we come from the primordial soup,,,I won't faint. I just don't see how it could be possible.
If this is the same as opposing it...so be it. But I don't think so.
You're right.So why are you arguing against it here?
If you don't think that scientist are abandoning this idea and moving on to others, there's no reason why it should be proven.
YOU believe EVERY scientist in the world agrees with evolution?
Is water we?
Do I have to prove it?
I can post names...what difference will it make?
I'm getting a little tired of proving statements that everyone should know are true...especially intelligent persons.
isnt an opinion can also be peer reviewed? isnt an article also a kind of an opintion?Yes, it is. It also publishes articles that are opinion pieces. Do you see an abstract? That is a clue that it is not peer reviewed. If you don't even know the general form of a peer reviewed article why are you even arguing here? You should be learning instead.
Nope, opinion pieces do not undergo peer review. Peer review applies to formal articles and that one clearly was not.isnt an opinion can also be peer reviewed? isnt an article also a kind of an opintion?
But it was an opinion piece. Please learn to tell the difference. In a peer reviewed article one must include observations and detailed descriptions of how those observations were attained. Do you see that in the article that you linked?it was published in that jornal and that journal is indeed peer reviewed.
Nope, opinion pieces do not undergo peer review.
Let me see, the first does not appear to be from a well respected peer reviewed journal. It was identified as a predatory publisher:lets say that its true. what about these other 2 articles?:
Genetic Analysis Of Coordinate Flagellar And Type Iii Regulatory Circuits In Pathogenic Bacteria
Evidence Of Design In Bird Feathers And Avian Respiration
I do know that gravity is not understood, but at least everyone knows it exists.
I looked at the link for Lucy. We would see all this back through my schooling years. It seems like not much has changed. What I find very interesting is the big jump to modern man. It seems like a really big change all of a sudden, by the timeline given.
Do you agree?
A couple of creationists speculating about a single type of flagellum and concluding Jesus. Totally impressive...lets say that its true. what about these other 2 articles?:
Genetic Analysis Of Coordinate Flagellar And Type Iii Regulatory Circuits In Pathogenic Bacteria
Why is a creationist physicist writing about bird lungs?
Also they both failed the challenge of being from a well respected peer reviewed journal. The source appears to be an example of the vanity press, a journal that will print anything as long as they get paid for it. They were on a lost of predatory journals. People publishing far outside of their areas of expertise making rather crazy claims, reputable journal or not? Do I even need to ask.A couple of creationists speculating about a single type of flagellum and concluding Jesus. Totally impressive...
Why is a creationist physicist writing about bird lungs?
Having read that particular article multiple times it does not actually present any evidence of design.
It's actually quite a poor article and I'm surprised the Discovery Institute would refer to it.
Well, they do have a publication issue. You may recall that the much lauded 'Bio-Logic institute' had a 'publication' page that for months only had a couple of Axe's and Guager's essays. It got really embarrassing for them, so they just plastered all of the publications, regardless of relevance, of pretty much everyone associated with the DI. Most likely in hopes that none of their target audience would actually look at the titles or actually read them.Having read that particular article multiple times it does not actually present any evidence of design.
It's actually quite a poor article and I'm surprised the Discovery Institute would refer to it.
my bed. i found it now that he also was a biologist (i dont know why i remember that he was just a geologist). but its irrelevant since even a non-biologist can write about biology if he give evidence to support his claims.Whatever gave you the idea that Darwin was a geologist?
Back then specialization did not occur as today. And you still have not realized that you used a failed source. I said that it had to be a well respected professional peer reviewed journal. The journal that you found is not well respected. It appears to be a member of the glamour press. It is a pay to publish outlet that will rubber stamp any idea where people have paid enough money.why darwin (a geologist) wrote about evolution?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?