“Why am I not surprised that you are attempting to provide a rationale for the actions of whacked out darwiniac global warming alarmists?”
—Why am I not surprised that you are attempting to link global warming with Darwinism.
I wasn’t defending global warming - I think both both sides have good points. Humphreys, as usual however, didn’t make any good points for his side and didn’t address any points at all from the opposing side - good or bad - they were all bizarre strawmen. As in the past, he should do at least a few minutes of research before writing on a subject.
And nothing you said had anything to do with anything I said.
==Humphreys, as usual however, didn’t make any good points for his side and didn’t address any points at all from the opposing side
What do you mean by “as usual”? I have read his books, articles and scientific papers, and they are of far superior to the drivel that passes for science or science reporting emanating from the fanatical evo/global warming alarmists. And contrary to your baseless assertion, he corrected a number of global warming myths, and pointed to a much better creation science explanation for past and current climate activity.