Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Jan 25, 2010, 08:07:

You're missing the point of Darwin's finches. They are cited as evidence of speciation, which they are. However, what do we find in them? Finches evolving into some new organisms with new, more complex code for new physical structures and functions? No, Darwin's finches evolved into . . . finches.

Again, where did the finches come from? If they've always been there, where are the finch fossils?

I posted a link to a Darwinist site. I wonder why?

Me too, since you still haven't explained what facts they get wrong there.

And how does a list of ancient reptiles and birds show "common descent"? Archaeopteryx was a bird.

It, among other fossils, show that the distinction between dinosaur and bird was less and less the further back you go. Birds are dinosaurs. Just like humans are apes.

So, how can you tell which fossil produced which fossil?

Fossils don't, as far as I'm aware, produce fossils.

Unless you authored and produced TalkOrigins and the fifteen videos, you're not articulating anything that you know to be true of Darwinism.

State one fact that you know to be true about Darwinism and how you know it's true.

The answer to your second question I've stated several times and is contained in the answer to this: What, exactly, have you observed in the fossil evidence?

So we now come to the point where you've abandoned any attempt to have a rational discussion and are insisting that unless I go out and do all the scientific work personally

none of the evidence I point to is valid in your mind.

You don't point out any problems with the evidence other than the fact that I didn't personally handle the fossils myself

or do the analysis myself

The site references dozens of peer-reviewed sources. If that's not acceptable to you, then you're calling all of science into question now rather than disputing any particular finding. Thanks for clearing that up.