Another theory that must be rejected by conservatives

[orogenicman]

Because you can't offer up any evidence to support your own claim. As such, any other idea, supported or not holds as much creedence as your own.

Except that we have offered up plenty of scientific evidence to support our claims, and yet we are still waiting for evidence that ET landed, and that you are actually a biochemist.

 

[orogenicman]

No you haven't. You have been providing stories not supported by any evidence at all.

So DNA evidence showing that all life above sponges contain sponge DNA is a "story"? You're a, ahem, biochemist. Certainly you understand the concept of gene sequencing, right?

 

[orogenicman]

"Being a scientist, I recognize science when I see it and I recognize scientific principles at work."

Except you seem to have a hard time conceptualizing the fact that the Earth is an open system, and that as such, the laws of thermdynamics don't have the same effect on the evoution of life as it does on the evolution of the universe, which is a closed system.

 

[orogenicman]

"I don't know that I have ever heard anyone present religion as scientific fact."

Ever been to the creation museum?

 

[orogenicman]

"Evolutionary theory is rife with assumption and very, very poor in terms of hard fact."

Perhaps you could fill us in on what all those wrong assumptions are, and what hard facts we don't have.