Tyke: The Straw Man Builder....Re: Darwinists citing Darwinists
> Tyke: I still await ONE mathematician who agrees that lack of deathTin: After being confronted with impressive evidence of
> causes life or that randomness causes order.
mathematicians accepting evolution powerfully contradicting his
foolish rhetoric...the now enfeebled Tyke can only come up with a
dim, thoughtless, straw man.
He refuses to debate inside of the reality that selection and
random change work as a dyad to build things ranging from poker hands
to meaningful english sentences -- to the evolution of new adaptive
Unable to intelligently critique real evolution, he can only
play with his own childish straw man.
Poor helpless Tyke.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Craig" <falsecut@...>
> --- In email@example.com, "tykemorris"
> <tykemorris@> wrote:
> It is Darwin's mathematical fallacy that
> > they and I refute. Also, most mathematicians have not even made any
> > public statements regarding Darwinism. What I did say is that I have
> > read the opinions of literally hundreds of mathematicians and have
> > yet to find ONE who agrees with the Darwinian Fallacy.
> Is there a reason that you think that repeating this lie gives your
> statement some validity?
Tyke, please do as so many have asked & name these hundreds of
"mathematicians" whose "opinions" you've read, providing links to the
specific statements of each. Then pick the one you think is the most
persuasive & actually post here the assumptions & calculations based
thereupon which he or she presents.
The professional mathematical, statistical & scientific organizations
all around the world, numbering hundreds of thousands of members,
including all those individuals who have made the greatest
contributions, not only disagree with your gibberish but would laugh
out loud in your face at your preposterous lies.
I've posted over & over & over again the statements on evolution of
these organizations, which give the lie to your lies. Every leading
scientist & mathematician in the world not only accepts the validity
of evolution via selection & stochastic processes, but many of them
have dedicated their life's work to studying evolutionary theory in
the lab, the field & computational analyses. Same goes for those who
study the evolution of the universe.
Some cosmologists do find reasons for making the metaphysical
supposition that the laws that rule our universe could have been set
by a First Cause, & see no scientific argument for necessarily not
concluding that such could be the case. But today few or none of them
can divine scientific or mathematical reasons to imagine that life on
earth hasn't evolved entirely naturally through both Darwinian &
statistical processes (even if they suppose, unnecessarily, that the
same or another Cause might lie behind the original appearance of