Tara and Revere are both confronting the creationist anti-mutation 'argument.' I've faced this before regarding antibiotic resistance. I find it ironic that Mike Martin argues against evolution by mutation, when other creationists argue that small mutations happen, but 'kinds' are immutable. I wish these guys would figure out which idiocy they plan to adopt.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
While the most recent misrepresentation of antibiotic resistance at Answers in Genesis by Georgia Purdom is not of the two usual varieties (either resistance evolves through gene transfer, and therefore mutation does not cause antibiotic resistance, or resistance arises through mutations only, and…
Some of my fellow ScienceBloglings have written about Conservapedia's treatment of evolution. What has always puzzled me about creationists is the rather frequent denial of mutation. For example, in the section on macroevolution, titled "Is the theory of macroevolution true?"*--which should tell…
I have to admit that creationists are a creative bunch, if not accurate. From the files of the Mad Biologist comes this post about a creationist explanation of antibiotic resistance. It's pretty remarkable. And I hope nobody tells the Coultergeist about this argument... (originally published…
There was a lot wrong with Micheal 'Lilo' Behes description of HIV-1 in last years book, 'Edge of Evolution'. There is a lot of discussion in the Evilutionist community as to what constitutes a Creationist, but there are a few mistakes Creationists continually make when trying to argue against…
how sublime,
to choose between the evil of two lessors