@eddie, why does he argue against Darwinism when it has already been falsified? What does it matter to anyone if Darwism is not sufficient when we already agree this is true, for far better reasons than he has offered?
@eddie, why does he argue against Darwinism when it has already been falsified? What does it matter to anyone if Darwism is not sufficient when we already agree this is true, for far better reasons than he has offered?