From: 69jpil69@gmail.com   
      
   On Thu, 13 Nov 2025 12:08:54 -0600, sticks    
   wrote:   
      
   >I can't help you with your problem of conflating a sig file and then    
   >discussions separate from one.  I will have one last word on this stupid    
   >sig file issue you have, and then I'm done with it.  YOU make all these    
   >connections yourself.  I have stated several times I do not reject    
   >science.  The sig file does not say every damn scientist in the world    
   >supports Darwin.  It says scientists are the ones who do.  Would you    
   >have me exclude every scientist who doesn't?   
   >   
   >In essence the sig file says that I don't believe the evidence supports    
   >Darwinian evolution, only the words of people, some of whom are    
   >scientists does.  Disagree with it all you want.  I'm done talking about    
   >it.  It's a waste of time.   
      
      
   If so, then you owe all in this froup an apology for bringing it up in   
   the first place.   
      
   More to the point, you're entitled to ignore the vast majority of   
   scientists who recognize the validity of Darwinian evolution, but to   
   say science doesn't support it is simply factually incorrect.  That   
   puts you in the "willfully stupid and proud of it" camp.   
      
   --    
   To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)