rationalskepticism.org

halucigenia wrote:

stevebee92653 wrote:Thanks for the thread. It's always fun to find out "why I am wrong". Your explanation of the missing early AND extant multi-celled species is just another of the thousands of excuses that you have to come up with in order to keep evolution patent.

Is that all you have to say in response to my telling why you are wrong? Why not just come out and tell us why you think that your "Why are monkeys not still evolving into humans" argument actually has any value in refuting evolution. I have shown you why it does not, namely that the theory of evolution does not depend on what you claim should be happening i.e. it does depend on whether we see single celled organisms turning into multi celled organisms today or not. Even if evolution had somehow magically stopped happening today we would still have sufficient evidence from other sources like the fossil record and genetics etc. to show that it was true.

I am specifically taking one assertion at a time so I will not let myself get dragged into your other assertions in your first reply to my explanation of why you are wrong on this particular assertion. However, it is noted that you seem to be depreciating this particular assertion by asserting that "it goes with the fact that..." as, although you just keep repeating these various assertions over and over again, they are not necessarily linked in any way apart from the fact that they depend on totally misunderstanding and misinterpreting what the theory of evolution actually does propose.

Oh, and just so you know, Punctuated Equilibrium is actually an evolutionary explanation for the patterns that we see in the fossil record and in no way equates to anything that is missing from the fossil record. But that would be another why you are wrong moment for another post.