NoName
Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013
|
| Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,13:33) | But while you're at it feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions "evolved" and are "born" and "captured" particles, etc..
In my opinion their grammar is just fine. But I know how some have nothing better to do than argue over semantics. |
Show that anyone else on earth shares your massive confusion over whether the theory of evolution makes these claims.
In a metaphorical fashion, one can loosely state that calcium ions evolved through nucleosynthesis in stellar reactions.
But the theory of evolution involves biology, especially at the macro level, individuals, groups of individuals, species, genera, families, etc. [Oh, you're going to get confused over this use of 'family', aren't you?]
The only one here arguing over semantics is you, with your absurdist attempt to dismiss my criticisms as being the mere uncritical acceptance of 'religious' dogma. You haven't shown that religion in any proper sense of the term is involved at all. You haven't shown that there's a "clubhouse", let alone one from which you are brutally and unfairly excluded. There is the field of science, but it's not even in the same country you occupy, let alone within your actual reach.
Worst of all, you haven't addressed any of the criticisms that have demolished your "theory" into its component tard-ons.
But ooooh, you're busy doing sciencey kinds of things! You're important. Utter nonsense.
Finally, let us pause to note the mass destruction of irony meters in the face of your assertion that somehow "in your opinion" serves to, in any way, strengthen or justify a claim. You've so thoroughly established otherwise that we can pretty much take it as natural law that your utterances will be false, and/or gibberish, and generally disconnected from any flow of conversation.
|
