That would by why I called it “the subject of your last link” rather than, say, “the subject of all your links”.
there’s a whole section on experiments for testing evolution through Random Mutation and Natural Selection.
I do not think anything on that page says very much about whether the evolution of life on earth (including in particular human life) has benefited from occasional tinkering by a god or gods. (For the avoidance of doubt: I am very confident it hasn’t.)
I don’t think theistic evolution is that much more rational than standard creationism.
I think it’s quite a bit better—the inconsistencies with other things we have excellent evidence for are subtler—but that wasn’t my point. I was just trying to avoid arguments with strawmen. If Erik accepts common descent, there is little point directing him to a page listing evidence for common descent as if that refutes his position.
That would by why I called it “the subject of your last link” rather than, say, “the subject of all your links”.
I do not think anything on that page says very much about whether the evolution of life on earth (including in particular human life) has benefited from occasional tinkering by a god or gods. (For the avoidance of doubt: I am very confident it hasn’t.)
I think it’s quite a bit better—the inconsistencies with other things we have excellent evidence for are subtler—but that wasn’t my point. I was just trying to avoid arguments with strawmen. If Erik accepts common descent, there is little point directing him to a page listing evidence for common descent as if that refutes his position.