One of the more obvious reasons could be that unless the majority of the genes (in the plural because I'm betting any genetic component is polyphyletic) associated with homosexuality are homozygous for an individual the result is beneficial.
Even if this were true the Theory of Evolution (ToE) does not need to explain this because the ToE is about Biology and not history.
Your agument is akin to saying "ToE does not explain Gravity, and that is a big problem".
Even if this were true the Theory of Evolution (ToE) does not need to...
Because exams are marked by the exam board the school pays for the exam papers.
And there is the small matter that the City & Guilds Institute tests and GCE (O and A levels) exams were tests for students of age 16 and over, barring the odd exception where a student could take an exam earlier...
I hope they do, because they will see your errors and that I was being truthful about what was in the links you supplied.
Your inability to understand english is no problem but your own.
In the "High School" link the word standard as applied to classes and numbered as you claimed only appears...
Evidence? Because according to your "High School" link the information on India makes no mention of "standards", nor does it do so for New Zealand, South Africa or Singapore.
Your forum link indicates the New Zealand used to use the term Standard but only in primary school and no mention was...
We've seen what your witness is worth, I doubt many people will believe this without some firm evidence to back up your claims.
I am a witness as well, I was educated in Britain. My mother, my aunt and their father were all teachers and my sister is a teacher.
I spent the majority of my school...
You do realise that you are contadicting the bible don't you.
If the boundary of Kind is drawn by the inability to fertilise this would mean that when a new species arises (which has been observed) it is a different kind to the generations of animals that it arose from.
You are propoposing...
Any is also grammatically correct.
No its not contradictory per se by your definotions of the terms man and race, its nonsense in terms of biology as man is a race and there is only 1 race if men, but not contradictory.
At this point, with multiple people having shown you that you are wrong...
No, because that's not what the words mean.
An explanation does not have to be true to be an explanation. You are admitting it is an explanation every time you qualify it. But if you want to have your own personal definitions for words thats fine, just don't expect other people to agree with...
What leap of faith? Almost every definition of hypothesis states that it is indeed an explanation, e.g.
a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observations
a tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or...
:facepalm:
So was I (and english was one of my better subjects at school).
Btw
"No person is promoted to the next higher class unless first he passes that final exam"
Completely false. No one is allowed to study for a higher qualification in a subject unless they achieve an acceptable grade...
Trying for an Argument from authority I see.
Its already been countered by the multiple people on this board who have told you its not a contradiction and even explained why its not.
Your desparation not to accept that you are mistaken is now laughable.
I'll propose that view as well, in scientific terms a hypothesis also provides an explanation. But that explanation is a proposed explanation and until tested is considered provisional but still an explanation, all that is required is that it be testable and falsifiable.
(1) a confirmed...
That is a quote-mine. You have deliberately omitted a third of that sentence, which is the part which explicitly explains that Coelacanth is the common name for a group of species.
Its because you didn't know what an order was isn't it. Now that you have been told that it is a taxonomic ranking...
You mean other than the paper published by Brendan McKay, Dror Bar-Natan, Maya Bar-Hillel, and Gil Kalai (MBBK) in Statistical Science in 1999. Thats the same journal that published Witztum, Rips, and Rosenber's (WRR) paper on the bible code in 1994.
Yes you read that right, the MBBK paper is...