reply to post by pieman
i never said i had a problem with any observations or theories of a process. i said i call people "evolutionist" because they treat evolution
as an article of faith. i couldn't comprehend your question because i had no idea what it was related to.
We'll just ignore the first statement for now and discuss the term alone. The observation of one species evolving into another species is not a
matter of faith, it's an actual observation that lead to the development of a theory that attempts to explain how that process works.
i have no idea what you're saying here.
Well that much is certainly clear! You claim English is your first language, yet call into question my ability to converse in the language and you
can't even show proper punctuation. To top that off, your argument appears to be born from either a lack of understanding the theory or a blatant
misunderstanding of the theory. I haven't decided which it is yet.
actually, i'm just going to back away slowly, i'm wasting my time and i think you're getting a bit upset.
Upset huh? Appears you don't know how to read emotional responses properly either. If anything, you've been the one getting all up in a bind over
this. Go ahead, back away. Maybe take that time to review a few websites on Evolutionary Theory and some new articles discussing the observations of
evolution in the wild. Hopefully you'll learn something and I do apologize if I am not the best of teachers. It's not my profession and to be
honest, I don't know *how to teach* anyone anything, let alone a complex theory describing an observation occurring in nature.
|
