Did Douglas Axe Disprove Evolution? Spoiler: No

[lee_merrill]

@John_Harshman

@lee_merrill

Clusters could be rare in such timeframes, we only need to see at least one new body plan in each period.

Yes, and he provides no evidence that such a thing would be expected.

Bechly in his challenge, references his contribution to the book “Theistic Evolution”, and to his chapter entitled “Does the Fossil Record Demonstrate Darwinian Evolution?” in the book “The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith” as containing evidence for this claim.

@John_Harshman

@lee_merrill

Various hypotheses about the cause indicates that there is no firm conclusiion yet, thus it’s still rather a mystery.

I can’t see how that was at all unclear. Let me repeat: “All we can really say is that some hypotheses make sense given what we know and others don’t. But I don’t see that we can confidently narrow it down to one.”

That’s fine, multiple hypotheses therefore exist, along with some that seem to be good ones.

[lee_merrill]

@John_Harshman

In the latter case, one might theorize that the lack of response is due to a belief that you aren’t paying attention and that Axe’s claims have been handily refuted many times.

I don’t think so! Please point to one unrefuted point you all have made here. Just one. Then please respond to Axe’s response to Art Hunt, which no one has done here.

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@lee_merrill

Then please respond to Axe’s response to Art Hunt, which no one has done here.

Ahem. LMAO

[John_Harshman]

@lee_merrill

Bechly in his challenge, references his contribution to the book “Theistic Evolution”, and to his chapter entitled “Does the Fossil Record Demonstrate Darwinian Evolution?” in the book “The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith” as containing evidence for this claim.

I have no access to that, but note that he, in that same challenge, cited at least one reference that doesn’t show what he claims. I’m dubious that this non-peer-reviewed apologetics article is a vlid source of real data. But have you read it?

@lee_merrill

That’s fine, multiple hypotheses therefore exist, along with some that seem to be good ones.

So you didn’t read it the first time?

[lee_merrill]

@Rumraket

@lee_merrill

Then please respond to Axe’s response to Art Hunt, which no one has done here.

Ahem. LMAO

So please point me to one response to Axe’s response to Art Hunt. I may have missed it, but this response you give is not that.

[lee_merrill]

@John_Harshman

I’m dubious that this non-peer-reviewed apologetics article is a vlid source of real data. But have you read it?

I don’t have either of these books, but you did make a claim that he provided no evidence. And so far, that’s an unsupported conclusion.

[Paul_King]

@lee_merrill

I don’t think so! Please point to one unrefuted point you all have made here. Just one. Then please respond to Axe’s response to Art Hunt, which no one has done here.

I’ve read Axe’s response to Art Hunt. i don’t think any additional commentary is needed. Axe’s failure to provide a reasonable answer to any of the three points speaks for itself.

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@lee_merrill

I may have missed it

You didn’t. Try harder.

You read it, didn’t like it, and therefore rejected it. It’s still a response and it reflects poorly on you that you seem to have already forgotten it took place.

And I genuinely believe that my response factually refutes Axe’s, and that any disagreement anyone might want to make indicates nothing other than their lack of comprehension.

No, I can’t be bothered elaborating. If you don’t understand how my explanation responds to and refutes Axe’s response to Art Hunt, then I don’t think I can make you. But you should stop saying that nobody has responded.