On Apr 30, 4:03=A0am, "~sappy*graceless~" <veron...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
fulminated:
> "Tiktaalik" <corneliusjmch...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> skrev i
meldingnews:32826999-aee1-=
4f21-98a2-826dc039bd17@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Apr 29, 9:56 pm, "~saba*gracile~" <veron...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Danwood" <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> skrev i
meldingnews:fKuRj.144$_.96@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > "Kelsey Bjarnason" <kbjarna...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > >news:450fe5-pg6.ln1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> [snips]
>
> > >> On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 02:26:53 +0200, ~saba*gracile~ wrote:
>
> > >>> An alternative to evolution theory? Put the damn freud into the
tras=
hcan
> > >>> for starters, then we can start talking science.
>
> > >> You were asked for an alternative. One which works as well as
evoluti=
on,
> > >> makes as many validated predictions (or postdictions, as the case
may=
be)
> > >> as evolution, and is supported by as much evidence as evolution.
>
> > > How does postdictions differ from 20/20 hindsight?
>
> > >> It is wholly pointless to point at something - evolution, whatever
- =
and
> > >> scream how we need to replace it, unless one has something *better*
t=
o
> > >> offer.
>
> > > Why must something to replace evolution be presented. One should be
> > > able to falsify any argument or theory without offering an
altenative =
to
> > > replace it.
>
> > Because it's a religion, it's their TRUTH. Either one must shut up or
fi=
nd
> > something else as an alternative, just like the Jehovahs Witnesses
deman=
d.
> > It's not science, its just dogma.
>
> My karma just ran over your dogma.
>
> -->nice, dumbass.
Nothing remotely nice about you, you're a nasty dumbass.
"I am in favour of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the
way of a whole human being." (Abraham Lincoln).
>=A0The JW's claims everyone who doesn't believe in their
> theories are idiots, the evolutionists play the same game.
>
> S- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
