I am highly skeptical of anyone proactive for both vaccines and eugenetics. One being Jonas Salk.
SV40-Cancer-Polio Vaccine Link
Cancer risk associated with simian virus 40 contaminated polio vaccine. - PubMed - NCBI
Which potential fossils are you referring to?
When we reduce to initial causes you, I, or anyone else does not know based upon material evidence. What people decide for themselves is irrelevant. Unfortunately, most people do not even decide or think for themselves as is.
I don’t care what...
First, I hope you decide to modify your post as you’ve quoted what I’ve said, and added your own words to it. “Did you read that, so why did you offer it?” That line was never said by me.
Yes, it’s already been clearly demonstrated by emotional hostility from a few that are now ignored who...
Easy ignore as well.
Disagreement is great, but all you had to do was provide the substance and definitions I asked for, no other finger pointing salads, and judgmental salads were ever needed. Keep talking the way you do to others and you’ll have nobody left to respond to you.
You’re an easy ignore.
You’ve single-handedly managed to distort and alter so many words, on top of quote mining in a few short posts it’s not even worth the effort.
Informative, thank you. You spent some time and good effort, diligently writing about how new genes and variation may arise within the same specie listed in the follow up example. I do have some questions and responses to a few things. I also agree that new genes can arise in the same species...
The answer is rather simple. You do not know if Charles did or didn’t. You place faith in the testimonies of humans who present Charles as not to have done that, have a natural tendency to lie, destroy, act, deceive, manipulate.
I know that if I were in a state of bias, I’d defend Charles and...
That is a rather dense definition of a creationist. Evolution theory could have occurred mostly how believed to have and it does nothing to disprove or prove natural creators. Many creationists believe evolution theory as is.
Science wouldn’t be science if nobody were a skeptic or questioned...
Rather than avoid... present an example or define evidence and an example or definition of non-evidence, according to Subduction Zone. I don’t have the entire community at my disposal, so you will have to speak on behalf of evidence and non-evidence for your community.
I know that...
That is the point, going beyond Darwin’s ideas. I stated that many think the SET needs re-thought. Did you even read what was initially stated?
What’s up with adding creation into it, dispute of evolution? Seems completely irrelevant. Why did you do this?
You seem reasonable. You also seem to have sound judgement and self-control on whom you wish to communicate with and who not to communicate with, based on how irrelevant and useless bickering can get between humans.
The main areas of interest appear to be variation within species or if species...
Does evolutionary theory need a rethink?
I understand the internal conflicts with evolution theory. I also understand it is easy for many to sit back, avoid, dismiss, downplay, and hide in comfort rather than address. There is no point if anyone doesn’t critique or question.
Let’s try one more time:
What is and what is not evidence, according to Subduction Zone?
Do you wish to keep avoiding or answer and help me learn since you’ve already made the initial false accusation that I do not know? Once you remove the false accusations from yourself, you will clearly be...
Many humans are doing the reciprocal of what they are predicted and should be doing.
How can I or anyone be fit to explain something that we don’t naturally abide by?