Joined: Feb. 2008
|Quote (Ftk @ Oct. 06 2008,12:42)|
|So, since I was polite and have been patiently waiting for Tom's response, I'm avoiding everyone else. Whatever. I'll get back to it, and when I do, I'D LIKE TO USE RED LETTER IN SOME PARTS OF IT INSTEAD OF BLACK.|
IS THAT POSSIBLE, STEVESTORY????
Right, when it is pointed out that you have made fundamental, glaring errors, the "polite" thing to do is ignore that, unless a specific person points them out.
For example, after reading http://genomicron.blogspot.com/2007/04/word-about-junk-dna.html would you still consider to your statements about "darwinsts" and "junk DNA" to be correct ? If so, what are the specific errors in the above linked post ? If not, do you agree that your previous statements on the topic were false and ill informed ?
You also haven't answered Toms question here:
Given our earlier exchange, I'm curious: do you accept that humans and other great apes share (or could conceivably share) a common ancestor?
Because if you don't, all that explaining I did about segmental duplication would have made zero sense to you. The technical details I tried (unsuccessfully, I fear) to convey really have no meaning outside of the context of a phylogenetic tree.
If you're still working on digesting the details, I'd suggest in that case that it might not be worth pursuing.
ETA: The question is a sincere one, and not meant to put you on the spot.
Note that instead of answering this, you started a tangent about the worlds religions supporting "design"
You don't need fancy formatting. You need to make coherent, logical points based of facts.