Why do people deny evolution?

"effective" assumes an expected result, having a purpose.

Im no "purist" when it comes to trout fishing, Ill use worms if I feel like. I garden my tomatoes well before Late May, and I, like Frank, actually like a lot of rap music. Im certainly not a purist in anything. I do , however, like precision in thought, IF NOT IN SPELLING.
Jut lave it lie there, I shant chide you further on such a basic issue.

Personally, I do think there is a Divine purpose to evolution, but neither you nor I can settle that question definitively, and that wasn't the purpose of my using the word effective anyway.

But thanks for your promise to leave a numbskull like me alone for now.

I'll chide you further fm. Where is your answer to the question I asked you? Your evolutionist fans won't be able to think straight on the matter without your guidance. They'll end up not knowing whether they are evolutionists or Christian sentimentalists.

Maybe a haircut is in order if your scientific nerve has failed. Everybody knows endogamy is fatal to evolution and those ladies are set to avoid it.

You look like you are admitting that there are some subjects that evolutionists are too genteel to consider. Many more that this one.

I was myself abducted at 18 and thrown into the company of city lads who polluted my innocence all to **** and look how I turned out. I can still clearly remember the first photo of city life that they showed me. I was astonished.

Jeez, fm, Tweedledum and Tweedledumber have you stumped now.

An evolutionist cannot accept that any "rise" has taken place. Darwin made that quite clear. The idea that man is the pinnacle of biological evolution is enough to make a cat laugh.

Cod evolutionists are another matter. They decide for themselves what to accept. You can imagine the theological cracks they have slipped down with such self-justifying and anti-scientific mannerisms. Not that it is very well mannered mind trying to get others to follow them bearing in mind the unfortunate dispositions to be found there.

The evolutionist position on the Nigerian schoolgirls is simple and clear.

finn always makes sure that he can remove himself from any self imposed "corners". I have no idea what spendi is talking about since Ive already stated that hiss most recent question was inane anyway.

I shall now retire to grille up some brats with onions.

It doesn't matter who has him stumped ed. It is the fact of him being stumped that matters. In full view.

I'm surprised at you sticking labels of your own choice on who has fm stumped thinking that they somehow prove he's not stumped or only stumped a little bit. It shows you underestimate the intelligence of readers here as if they will fall for such a soft trick.

What's your evolutionist stance on the abduction of 200 odd, they haven't got the count right yet, teenage virgins in Nigeria. Some of them might end up better fixed than what their village has to offer.

One father I saw was weeping while saying that he didn't know how he could manage without his daughter.

It's a great way to avoid answering a question is declaring it to be "inane" or any other mush of the same order. It works every time.

It's a bit embarrassing though. At least you have the decency to leave the room.

why isn't it inane?

I don't underestimate people's intelligence. Most regular posters are quite intelligent. It's the willingness to stonewall a subject or make charges that are simply untrue that gets me to posting. You guys are like mosquitoes buzzing fm and not able to draw a speck of blood.

Because it is a big international story with US and UK military input and an evolutionist should have a position on it from an evolutionary perspective.

But I understand your coy responses.

I need to understand your connection twixt my positions on naturl selection nd the recent kidnapping of the schoolgirls in Nigeria.
Its a tragedy and the perps should be dealt with harshely and perhqps, even mde an example of. However, is there a connection to evolution I am missing here?
Perhaps you should alert the media.

Of course you do. You tried to trick members by using the phrase "Tweedledum and Tweedledumber" to play down fm being stumped when he is actually stumped all ends up.

It is a scientific fact that exogamy is a key driver of evolution. Cross cultural fertilisation. Are you making out that morality trumps biology? That would be a turn up for the book.

You are too kind.

Of course. It is you being an evolutionist only in certain circumstances which is not a position you take on gravity.

I don't believe you don't understand the point.

As an evolutionist you can only look at problems biologically. That's why most people deny evolution.

From what I have read the Watson of DNA fame would understand the point.

Isn't endogamy the weak spot in the eugenics movement?

You misspelled "logically" theres no "bio" in it

The name sticks, because of the way youse guys are presenting yourselves.

Your Catholic upbringing is peeping out old boy.

You're not up for this ed.