Intelligent Design is not creationism

[2cents]

Quote from 2cents:

i don't care if jampi or zizzz are the same or different species...

basically there are positive answers to jampi's question... if you find them, don't blow it... if he's got any balls, i am expecting him to meet this test first:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1279073&highlight=erroneous#post1279073

what is he afraid to lose?

and u and zizzz are still on square 0

 

[john dough]

See below...

Quote from Jampilier:

No, infertility with A is required by definition.

Whose definition would that be -- your supervisor at Walmart?

With any mutation effecting the fertility of an individual within either AA or BB, there is now a new group CC composed of only that member. Surely you realize that.

I realize that you are either incapable of comprehending or intentionally refusing in order to protract what would otherwise result in your argument being destroyed.

Exactly, it is INFERTILITY between A and AA or BB that is required, as well as impossible. Also, the extinction of A does not solve the problem of its fertility with a supposed new species. They don't have to actually meet or otherwise coexist for the potential to interbreed to be a structural reality.

Sounds familiar. I think I heard this explanation once from one of my children while she was sucking her thumb and lying down for a nap.

You're still on square one.

Uh hummmm...riiiiiiight.

 

[Jampilier]

Quote from john dough:

Uh hummmm...riiiiiiight.

With any mutation effecting the fertility of an individual within either AA or BB, there is now a new group CC composed of only that member.

That's the takeaway.

 

[john dough]

Quote from Jampilier:

With any mutation effecting the fertility of an individual within either AA or BB, there is now a new group CC composed of only that member.

That's the takeaway.

The only "member" that's been taken away here is the one between your legs.

 

[2cents]

Quote from john dough:

Uh hummmm...riiiiiiight.

how about this john? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3790531.stm

 

[Jampilier]

Quote from john dough:

The only "member" that's been taken away here is the one between your legs.

Ah yes, the surest sign of an ass-kicking thoroughly received:

The bitchy ad hominem comeback.

 

[2cents]

Quote from 2cents:

how about this john? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3790531.stm

or this? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031208141435.htm

jampy's only got questions, no responses... same as zizzz... lets be kind bro

 

[john dough]

Quote from Jampilier:

Ah yes, the surest sign of an ass-kicking thoroughly received:

The bitchy ad hominem comeback.

Whatever.

 

[2cents]

and here are more examples just for fun http://news.softpedia.com/news/Experimental-Evidence-for-the-Appearance-of-New-Species-40812.shtml

john - all jampy and zizzz gained is irritating you thanks to a skilfull use of bad faith... ever heard of "Teach the Controversy"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teach_the_Controversy

still waiting for jampy, or zizzz, to show some balls though... basically not a single one of jampy's assertions stands true... game, bible boys?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Still waiting for you to prove your claim that everyone who supports ID in these threads is a single personality...

Quote from john dough:

Still waiting for you to prove your above claim that neither the origin of biological life by chance or design can withstand scientific scrutiny.