Yes, biology is a demonic branch of science, geology is blasphemous, and astronomy is an attempt to corrupt young minds and open them to the evils of astrology.
I don't reject macroevolution and abiogenesis because they are the same; there are enough other reasons to toss them. I was griping about the tendency of debaters and pseudoscientists to "prove" macroevolution via microevolution, and then take abiogenesis as a given--after all, they just proved macroevolution, so that proves the entire theory. In other words, evolution is presented for public consumption as a seamless theory starting with a big bang and ending with us. It's almost as if the public couldn't handle the knowledge that scientists don't have everything worked out. If evolutionists were more interested in public understanding of their theory, they would work a little harder at clearing up common public misconceptions of it.
*joins dogscoff in running and screaming--six miles later, stops and wonders exactly why and where we're running*
[ May 19, 2003, 14:06: Message edited by: Krsqk ]
__________________
The Unpronounceable Krsqk
"Well, sir, at the moment my left processor doesn't know what my right is doing." -
Freefall
Re: "Real" ringworlds
Threaded Mode