From: martinharran@gmail.com   
      
   On Sun, 25 Jan 2026 22:48:49 -0500, Chris Thompson   
    wrote:   
      
   >Martin Harran wrote:   
   >> On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 22:34:44 -0500, Chris Thompson   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Martin Harran wrote:   
   >>>> On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 09:57:04 -0800, Vincent Maycock   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 16:11:02 +0000, Martin Harran   
   >>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> snip   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> The ToE was developed   
   >>>>>> inside Darwin's head, Natural Selection is not something we can   
   >>>>>> directly examine by  putting it inside a test tube or picking up to   
   >>>>>> measure or weigh - it is an intellectual explanation for what we see   
   >>>>>> happening in evolution.   
   >>>   
   >>> Wow wow wow wow.   
   >>>   
   >>> And just like that, millions of hours of field studies and thousands of   
   >>> peer-reviewed articles go POOF!   
   >>   
   >> As Thomas Edison put it "Genius is one percent inspiration,   
   >> ninety-nine percent perspiration." Darwin's identification of NS was   
   >> pure inspiration, prompting Huxley to declare"How incredibly stupid   
   >> not to have thought of that.". That inspiration, however, did not come   
   >> out of the blue, it came from the "perspiration" of many years of   
   >> studying evolution.   
   >>   
   >> The same applies to Lemaitre's identification of the Big Bang; it too   
   >> was inspiration after the "perspiration" of slogging through the works   
   >> of Einstein and Hubble; or Mnedel whose inspired identification of   
   >> traits working in pairs came from years of experimenting with peas.   
   >>   
   >> It seems to me that your remarks would be better pointed to Vincent   
   >> who doesn't seem to regard perspiration as particularly necessary.   
   >   
   >I don't think so. Vincent was not the one who asserted we cannot   
   >directly observe and measure natural selection.   
      
   Nor did *I* say we could not observe it - on the contrary, I referred   
   to "what we see happening in evolution."   
      
   >That assertion, to put   
   >it mildly, is utter bollocks.   
      
   It would be if I had made it.   
      
   Yet again, I wish people would criticise things I said rather than   
   things I didn't say.   
      
      
   >   
   >Chris   
   >   
   >   
   >> Questions have been asked about the existence of God for thousands of   
   >> years and millions of words have been published - Aquinas wrote about   
   >> 1.8 million in Summa Theologica alone. Vincent reckons that can all be   
   >> just ignored, that he can figure it out by simply reading one book   
   >> written about 3500 years ago, mostly figuratively, for an uneducated   
   >> audience.   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> I will see your "not something we can directly examine" and raise you a   
   >>> _Biston betularia_.   
   >>   
   >> Again, that would be better directed to Vincent who reckons the   
   >> supernatural cannot exist because it's not something that can be   
   >> directly examined.   
   >>   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)