In you, nothing has changed. There are a wealth of textbooks, journal articles and the like which explain in level of detail you wish the nature and mechanics of evolution. You refuse to consult these. Why?
Likewise Ophiolite, but time is of the essence If you have an argument you should make. I require your guidance to manuver through your argument..you provide none...
Hense..I will review your "refrences" at my own discretion. Why would it be anyother way when you've failed to explain your knowledge from those sources...and I suspect that this will illistrate the lack of direction in the rest of your post as I proceed to reply...
Correct. You don't know a lot about thermodynamics. In an open system with high energy flow, wherein the system is far from equilibrium, it will self organise. This has been observed in all kinds of chemical, biochemical, physical and biological systems.
I'm shocked..you've managed to explain at least something. However...of course there is an however...no illistration to drive home your point. I'd like to know more. You leave pertinent information out.
Nothing has changed indeed.
This is the central point you seem incapable of understanding, or unwilling to understand.
Of course Ophiolite understanding comes with knowledge or explanation...know of which you've imparted.
Don't take my word for it, go do a simple search on the web.
I won't be using the web. You see..I go to the Library. You remeber what those places look like?
i shall not waste my time doing this for you until you have shown at least some willingness to do some of this work yourself.
You shouldn't, I think you're unqualified to teach. You selfishly hold on to your knowledge and dangle it for supremcy. Wasting your time is an understatment of what you've been doing from the outset with me...You were a bully and you want me to back down.
[My so called tantrum was in response to your behaviour. You asked for references. I provided them. You refused to consult them.]
I call it like I see it. I never refused. You're lying now and grandizing yourself for your audience.
We have observed macro-evolution in the fossil record. By its very nature we should not expect to see it in the laboratory. WE have also observed plentiful evidence of it in genomes.
Never have we observed macro-evolution in the fossil record. You refer to appearance.
The work being conducted often involves a reductionist approach, so we are doing the exact opposite of extrapolating beyond a certain complexity.
I don't undersand. A reductionist approach...How so?
I've seen it in action in the fossil record and I've seen its footprints in the genomes.
Perception is imprecise.
I am not suggesting you should read these. You made an absolute statement that "most scientist feel that the work on figuring out evolution is done." I was demonstrating that such a statement was nonsense. Will you at least accept that, or does your character flaw prevent you ever admitting you are mistaken?
No, not really when a scientist like yourself relates that evolution is a fact and then proceeds to continue to research his "facts."
Because stubborn intransigence appalls me;
To compromise on the facts is illogical. It either is or isn't.
because refusal to look at the facts disgusts me;
I have no disgust toward you. and you have thrown out facts on improbable and coincidence, unavailabitly, and unkowns....with worlds such as wrong and irrelevant.
I wonder what it would feel like to feel as you do. Dismisive and flagrantly ineffuctual as a teacher. I was once told that if a teacher can't teach a wlling student then it is always the teachers fault.
because self righteousness sickens me;
Let me know when you get over that.
because your narrow minded outlook requires to be attacked both on the objective level and on a personal level.
Requires no...narrow minded, no...you don't like being wrong, Ophilolite. It's stuck in your craw that you can't explain this propperly. You don't like that I contest your word and your lack of expanation.
For the most part I shall leave the measured dissection of your nonsense to RiverWind, iceaura and others
Knock yourself out.
I shall do some of this, but I shall also continue to point out your personal deficiencies until you change, or I die or get bored.
I predict bored.
Because you're not a good conversationalist?
what there is overwhelming evidence for, that could and does fill entire libraries.
I love circumstantial evidnence as much as the next guy which in this case is yourself...but as an objective participant the circumstantial never proves antying. It only makes suggestion variable to the personage making the calims, which is yourself.
Your inability to understand the reality of evolution lies in your selective perceptions and unfounded self confidence.
hmmm.
Time and again you have noted that, for example, you are not a biologist, you don't knwo much about thermodynamics, etc. Yet you then make pronouncements that relate intimately to this very topic. This needs to be challenged, now and into the future.
Actually that was the first time I stated that. So we see that the lenses through which you view your world aren't allows based on the facts...but...upon emotion...indignities...that which I've visited upon you because of your rough-neck approach. The "pronoucements" you calim that I've made have all been quoted from your fellow scientist.
If you didn't understand the purpose of giving and quoting refrences and statements.. (That which you've failed to do) now you know...so that you can not claim that these are my words.
I'm sensing this is very difficult for you Ophilolite. Why don't you try again in a few months after I've considered your information and related it to the books I've already read. Go cool off, look at your approach and attempt to find out where you went wrong. A little self analysis never hurt anyone.