in #1308 you said, “just because a new form evolves does not mean that the old one has to go extinct.” , then in #1355 you said, “Most species, over 99%, go extinct.”
You cannot just change your position 180 degrees whenever its suits your argument. You cannot have it both ways.
No, species do...
The Nazis racist ideology was scientifically driven not religiously driven.
The Nazis racist ideology was based on scientific (biological) racism and the use of eugenics into its creed, they believed that empirical evidence support/justify racial discrimination, racial inferiority, or racial...
No one claimed that spontaneous generation came from Darwin. It’s much older than Darwin.
Louis Pasteur’s experiment is not pseudoscience, I guess you didn’t mean that.
In principle, both are about the false/unsubstantiated belief that live can emerge from nonliving matter.
In principle...
I said so many times that speciation is not a reason for the original species to go extinct. It’s actually a key element of my argument especially with respect to alleged Hominin Evolution.
If the alleged human transformation from LCA to Homo sapiens ever happened through speciation /...
The Nazis being atheists or theists is irrelevant to their racist ideology that was driven by their adaptation of eugenics, racial hygiene and social darwinism.
Nazi eugenics - Wikipedia
Racial hygiene - Wikipedia
Victims of the Nazi Era: Nazi Racial Ideology | Holocaust Encyclopedia...
What Europeans or Americans? How is that relevant to anything I’m saying?
My claim is “you cannot exist before your biological father” is that clear enough?
Per the alleged ToE, If a species “A" transform into species "B”, the process is gradual through numerous transitional forms. All these...
Not at all. It was not abused. Evolution got adapted as a premise by other scientists of different/related fields then eugenics or social darwinism naturally emerged along the course of expected advancements or applications of the very evolutionary ideas, both were endorsed by Darwin himself. It...
This alleged gradualism is absolutely a fundamental assumption of the ToE, if this gradualism as imagined by Darwin is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record (as stated by Gould and Eldredge), it necessarily means that the theory is false.
As I said many times, all scientists that I quote...
Exactly, except that alleged gradualism is virtually nonexistent in the fossil record.
You still insist on this nonsense. As I said multiple times, THE FOSSILS HAVE TO BE IN ORDER. The descendants cannot exist before the alleged ancestors.
1) The 375 mya Tiktaalik cannot be the missing...
I believe the words that came out of his mouth in a serious interview. It was not a joke.
I know what he said for a fact. Your opinion of what he may or may not believe is a meaningless biased opinion.
Did Ben Stein also trick Dawkins about what he thinks of God of the Old Testament? Dawkins...
No, they don’t.
Jumping to ridiculous conclusions per the examples shown in #1252 doesn’t prove anything other than the extremely biased interpretations.
Again, a chronologically ordered series of fossils showing a lineage of ancestors and descendants is a must if evolution is true. The...
I already explained to you that long stasis has nothing to do with the unbridged gaps in the fossil record. Time is irrelevant to the fact that transitional forms are needed if the ToE is true and more importantly the fossils have to be in order.
Regardless of any false/biased interpretation of...
If the statements of scientist of the highest caliber in these international conferences concerning the latest in the field and with the provided lectures supported by acknowledgments and references, are not credible, then what is?
I would value their statements as credible reference over your...
How is that moving the goalposts? Earlier quotes and the latest one are all by Eldredge and Gould. All quotes are about the same fact that the fossil record offers no support for gradual change.
That is why Eldredge and Gould proposed punctuated equilibrium in contrast with phyletic gradualism...
So you were wrong to deny the influence of evolution on eugenics.
I never said that eugenics or social darwinism is the work of Darwin, yet both are indeed influenced by his work.
He assumed quite a bit with not that much evidence.
Darwin’s idea of a spontaneously generated origin "LUCA"...
Did I ever claim that Newton or Einstein were biologists?
Wow! Their religions made them geniuses? I can’t make such a claim. It’s amazing that you did!! I guess you didn’t mean it.
Einstein believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza. Spinoza’s view was influenced by his own...
As I said multiple times, “viruses are not considered living organisms, but they’re indeed classified as microorganisms.” It can’t be that difficult for you to understand, is it?
1.2A Types of Microorganisms - Biology LibreTexts
Again, stop the nonsensical shift of the goalposts. Go ahead and...
I did copy from my previous posts as a summary for the convenience of other readers.
It’s not my conclusion; it’s an established fact regardless of your meaningless denial.
Where am I or the convenient time for me to log in to the forum is not your concern.
While eugenic principles have been historically practiced but the contemporary history of eugenics began in the late 19th century, when a popular eugenics movement emerged in the United Kingdom, and then spread to many countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and most European...
Meaningless denial. These are not my words. This is an exact quote from the link below. See the link again.
Punctuated equilibrium - Wikipedia
The question is not about how long a population of a species stay stable till the next change of selection pressures. The alleged speciation as driven...