Richard, what you are appealing to, is a preponderance of opinion, not of scientific fact. The one thing we can say about consensus science, is that it ain't science. If it were, science would have halted centuries past, and we would never know what is now known. Evolutionism changes the findings of experimental science to accomadate it's own dogma, rather than say....maybe we got it wrong, as it clashes with observational science. Brighter minds disagree with me, yes, but there are a fair number who don't wholesale buy the Darwin dogma. And since when did being a lawyer, make you a science authority. Methinks you don't present your case, because you can't. Fortunately, I don't need great learning, to point out the more basic damage in the evolutionist foundations. And that is damage, many honest evolutionist actually own up to.....I can quote them, if that is required.........
|