“If a fellow “evolutionist” provides incorrect information, I will point that out”.
Really?
I’ve not seen that, not only by you of your “fellow evos”, but by ANY evo.
Well, I take that back, recently “tenacious” something or other pointed out the mischaracterization of creationists on the idea that someone will go to hell if they believe in evolution, corrected his “fellow evo” on such nonsense.
But even then, that was more about eternal religious ideas than evo-religious ideas.
It’s laughablke how all over the map evos are...from origins not having anything to do with evolution, to evolution is theory not fact, to how it’s actually taught in public screwels to how insignificant evolution is in regards to the application of biology specifically and science generally.
IN FACT that would be all time consuming in regards to or compared to this subject!
“If a fellow “evolutionist” provides incorrect information, I will point that out”.
Really?
Yes, really. It's how science works. In fact, there was a very recent inane ICR article posted here recently
that made fun of that very concept. That is, scientists challenging other scientists' findings. It happens every day.
it’s laughablke how all over the map evos are...from origins not having anything to do with evolution, to evolution is theory not fact, to how it’s actually taught in public screwels to how insignificant evolution is in regards to the application of biology specifically and science generally.
I note you did not write that they disagree about the validity of evolution. Or the mechanisms in a general sense. I credit you for that. You've pointed out some areas of biology on the periphery of evolutionary theory (btw, everyone knows by now how evolution is a theory AND a fact. You've been directed to the explanation about 1000x by now.)
And really, accepting your criticism, I have yet to read an evolutionist condemning a fellow evolutionist to eternal damnation for philosophizing that the origin of life is related to the theory of evolution. Have you?