Saturday, October 15, 2011

According to joe-boi
October 15, 2011 at 6:09 pm


ID is not anti-evolution and I would say that any and all regulatory sequences refute the claim that evolution occurs via blind, undirected chemical processes.

ID claims that evolution occurs (mostly) via directed processes such as those found in targeted searches.

But then again evotards like you don’t seem to understand anything about Intelligent design.


joe-boi, you keep saying that ID is not anti-evolution, but are you willing to put that to a test? Get the powers that be on UD to post a poll that asks each IDiot whether they accept "evolution". Each IDiot that responds should have to include their UD user name in their response.

It's totally obvious that most or all IDiots do NOT accept that "evolution" has ever occurred, although sometimes one of you dullards will grudgingly accept that 'micro evolution' is a tolerable term to describe the variations within a species or 'kind'. If you IDiots aren't anti-evolution, then why do you have such a big problem with TEs? After all, they believe in a god but accept "evolution" too. If you religious IDiots accept "evolution", shouldn't you be embracing TEs?

And joe-turd, what you "say" about regulatory sequences or anything else is of no concern to science. The study of reality is not interested in or swayed by what a delusional basement dwelling tick infested clown fearing pud wanking muslim creationist toaster repairman says.