I agree with your response a few levels down. "PD" should type more and I don't think that PD has successfully argued that evolution is a fact. While you have been considerably more polite I don't think you have successfully made your case either.
How about we make sure we are using the same definitions for "evolution" before we get any deeper in to this. A short trip to Google found what appears to be notes for a lecture.
It seems likely that this is the definition of evolution that the Steves were in agreement about.
Would you care to comment on the section labeled "1." in the lecure notes? Are you arguing the same sort of case as Michael Behe?
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with your response a few levels down. "PD" should type more and I don't think that PD has successfully argued that evolution is a fact. While you have been considerably more polite I don't think you have successfully made your case either.
How about we make sure we are using the same definitions for "evolution" before we get any deeper in to this. A short trip to Google found what appears to be notes for a lecture. It seems likely that this is the definition of evolution that the Steves were in agreement about.
Would you care to comment on the section labeled "1." in the lecure notes? Are you arguing the same sort of case as Michael Behe?