Re: Bible, Evolution, TEism: Ray v. the Mob

On Jun 14, 11:03 am, Ray Martinez <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 14, 7:06 am, *** C <foo.dic...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ray Martinez wrote in talk.origins

On Jun 13, 2:23 pm, "Dana Tweedy" <reddfr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Ray Martinez" <pyramid...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

Yes, in case you have not heard I have changed my position. My
research into evolutionary claims/evidence has shown that
microevolution has not occurred.

How do you explain all the laboratory and field studies that show that
it has?

Question presupposes only one correct definition of evolution.

Well, yes. There really is only one correct definition of evolution.

What is the source for your claim that "there really is ***only one***
correct definition of evolution"?

Noone suggests that there is only one definition of evolution. What
is being suggested is that the definition that is most applicable is
the change in gene frequency over time. Darwin himself defined
evolution as descent with modification, which is what we're
discussing. The natural consequence of descent with modification is
speciation, which is what is frustrating you.


I would like you to support this claim. Please show me ANY scholar who
has said that "evolution has only ONE CORRECT definition"?

You do not get to redefine it.

Yes I do, and I already have. It's in my paper.

Well then, in that case I don't believe in microevolution either, if
you define microevolution as miniature invisible gnomes that get drunk
and fight resulting in some people's eyes to be blue instead of brown.


Here is a hint, if you invent some
strange definition of evolution, and then proceed to shoot it down,
you have only disproven your definition, not the real theory of
evolution. In other words, a strawman.

We shall see.

There's nothing to see, Ray. You've already told us that you intend
to attack your own personal definition of evolution which you haven't
shared with us. Tell us what your arcane definition is and we can see
if there is some correlation between your ideas and the ideas accepted
by the scientific community. If your ideas are meaningless, then so
will your paper be.

<snip>

.