Re: Neo-Darwinism is Dead.

On 7/31/24 1:20 PM, JTEM wrote:

  Bob Casanova wrote:
 

I've also heard that a new non-rocket propulsion system
(which also ignores science and evidence) will soon be
available; some genius with the handle "calmagorod" is
perfecting it even as we post.
>
And don't forget The Amazing Nando, who converses with rocks
(The Rock Whisperer?).

 Tee-hee!  Tee-hee!  You're so funny! And hilarious. You're
BOTH funny & hilarious! And clever. Oh so clever, you are!
No wonder you cower behind sock puppets; fear of all the
groupies hunting you down!
 Darwin was a dumb cunt who plagiarized his every word and
STILL got nearly all of it wrong. He wasn't even writing
about "Evolution." He was writing about "Common Descent."
And, no, he did NOT believe in "Evolution" not even after
others fed him the word. No, he agreed 100% with those who
would later REJECT evolution...

You should read this fine book:
https://www.amazon.com/Darwinism-Refutation-Myth-Soren-Lovtrup/dp/0709941536
Plenty of ammunition there, and Løvrup was a real biologist.
Here's a review:
https://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho28.htm
You're welcome.

The biggest problem with evolution, and I've already
committed you to the mental institution in your head so
don't try to react but, the biggest problem is that it's
upside down. What we call "Evolution" is a result and not
any kind of process.
 We look at the DNA in a population of flies. Ten years
later we look at that population's DNA again and find
that what typified it has changed. We call that evolution.
We call that CHANGE evolution. We call that RESULT of
pressures, international and external, evolution...
 Google:  Mutagens
 Now try to Google:  Sexual Selection
 One is a choice -- "THIS female gives me a boner, as opposed
to THAT female" -- the other a population is most likely to
be completely oblivious to. But, both can change the DNA
within a population.