Ugh! I feel so…betrayed by my expensive college education. Turns out Darwinism has little to nothing to do with scientific evolutionary theory which can be considered as showing adaptation from already-present traits at best:blush:. Darwin is a third-generation atheist/“transmutationist” via grandpa Erasmus Darwin; daddy Robert Darwin; and Charles’ rip-off of Alfred Russell Wallace’s essay that Chuck cadged before he ever set foot on the H.M.S. Beagle. Bogus! And I recall Lyell being used to uphold Darwin with no mention, as Wiker states, that Lyell bailed on Darwin’s strictly atheist theory as did Wallace and others. This is the juncture that the Vatican has inserted itself, saying evolution may exist but God is the Creator of the process/system. Darwin’s sad legacy of trying to erase Moses’ creation account has been the philosophical underpinning for atheistic genocidal elitism. But that’s to be expected when grandpa was licking his chops over the guillotines hacking heads off during the French Revolution.
What are you a scientist?
??? He/she doesn’t claim to be doing anything except relaying what was in the book. She’s not claiming to have scientifically tested and proved the info in the book.
She said “expensive college education” so I was asking if she was a scientist because scientists (especially in biology) learn about evolutionary theory. Which could explain why she felt “betrayed”.
Thanks for explaining, and apologies. I thought you were criticizing her. :o