Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@frumscientists I’m not sure how you call yourself a scientist without knowing that the things you mentioned that people don’t understand are a lot more understood than you think. Just because a layman does not understand something does not mean it is false. I could give you an in-depth lesson in biology, and demonstrate how these things are more supported than you think. The fact that you use the term “neo-darwinism” makes me again assume that you have very little knowledge of science. If I am wrong then please correct me, but you have no proper credentials, do you? And by credentials I don’t mean following debates on a blog, I mean something that you can show that would, for instance, make the scientific community take you seriously. “Neo-darwinism” makes you sound like a conspiracy nut, and if you used that around scientists you would be laughed at.
@benignuman Your claim about being able to be a good medical doctor or biologist without accepting evolution is irrelevant. First of all, I challenge you to find someone who has some valid credentials (i.e. a PhD in biology as opposed to access to a blog) who rejects evolution. You don’t have to understand evolution to be a medical doctor, just as a mechanic does not have to understand quantum physics in order to fix a car. As far as “micro-evolution” and “macro-evolution”, you are mistaken. Macro-evolution IS micro-evolution, just with more time. The evidence for macro-evolution is overwhelming, and not unproven a you say.