Yes I know, and you simply can not n understand why that is pointless. You are making a fundamental error of logic - while accusing me of having reading issues.
What? That didn't even make sense. You can't defeat a usage.
All definitions are flawed, you seem unable tk accept that simple fact...
The feedback is exactly what you wrote down yourself - the minor variations caused by genetic changes are acted upon by selection. Natural selection (as you clearly know because you gave a pretty good explanation in your post.t #205). Why not read God Lovers post #205?
No you didn't. You know that it is those mutations being acted upon by natural selection. You are pretending to be unaware of what you yourself wrote down as the process of evolution just one post ago.
Really? Please don't accuse your motives? You don't know how evolution works in one post, but...
Exactly. Moreover, how could it prove it false? It is a dissection of the definition, which can achieve nothing. Implicit atheism is a valid position under some definitions and not in others - not sure what point there is in arguing about that.
I have to point this out to you, but if what you wrote above is really what you think evolution is - then you could have answered your own objection about evolution being random chance. The description you give above is of a process that could perfectly well create an almost infinite complexity...
Neither do I. I just need a real honest exchange.
Let me put it this way;
You begin with a false dichotomy - that the alternative to an intelligent designer is God.
That is a false dichotomy, because you do not know if they really are the only two possible options.
Now, I won't pick up on...
I'm sorry no. I don't believe it is possible that you are being sincere. If you had any interest in discussing evolution meaningfully, you would know what 'evolution' means in biology. I doubt you live in a vacuum.
There is no 'correct' definition. You still don't get that?
Why? I can employ whatever usage I please, as can everyone.
Nope, the argument is not even effected.
You attack a phantom, drawn from a misconception I am clearly unable to express to you.
Under some definitions of atheism and God...
Well sure, which is why evolution is not just entropy. It is not random, not sure how missing the most fundamental understanding of evolution (that it is driven by feedback, and is not random) is 'nailing it'.
If that its nailing it - it is nailing it to the wrong tree. Were you to study...
I always think a smokey/ hickory kind of sauce works best with babies. I know that in todays busy world lots of us are worried about the calories - so have other atheists found a decent low sugar alternative?
Wow! So you substitute a simple, easy to understand proposition for one that I am not even sure of the meaning of? Why do that? Now I don't know what the proposition means.
I'm sorry, you lost me. My apologies.
The first proposition is binary - two possible states, the second renders four...
Mate you,are standing on some imaginary moral high ground flinging a lot of insults complaining about being insulted. You call me a troll, liar etc etc etc - but have not actually even tried to make any sort of argument, or participate on the topic - or even support any of your ridiculous and...