Posted: Jul 02, 2010 11:21 am
by Shrunk
PhiloKGB wrote:Ah, the fallacy of never-enough-detail. The underhanded creationist takes refuge here because he knows that biologists have neither the resources nor the inclination to reverse engineer a pathway for every feature. Moreover, they have absolutely no intention of doing so every time a creationist issues a poorly-considered challenge.


It's blatantly hypocritical, as well. There's no point in even asking CharlieM to provide details of the nature of his imagined "designer" or the mechansims by which this "designer" operates. Like all creationists, he'll just shrug his shoulders and say this is irrelevant.