>>13393573>"Macroevolution" is not even a thingit doesn't happen certainly but evolutiontards still use the word so you're wrong, just not in the way you were expecting
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/macroevolution/>It predicted that humans and fish >Huur duur it simular dna dat mean it relateds cuz i sayz soyawn,I don't share your religious conviction that similar dna=related ancestry
>>13393657>>13393881I'm a different anon. You are the one deflecting.
>>13394014>EpigeneticsROOFL
>The rest of us in the modern age understand it's simply a difference in scaleNo, it's not, it's a very clear distinction. Read the above link and educate yourself and your fellow ignorami who are in the modern age.
>ask for laboratory proof>give meaningless babble about "Predictions" in the fossilsWere these fossils in a lab? Didn't know dinosaurs had their own science labs. Ooops looks like you can't give lab test examples .
>It's more so that there are extremely complex webs of cause and effect.Is that why you and everyone itt have failed to explain it?
>It's so common that we even have a full suffix for the phenomena, phobia.Animals don't have random phobias, at least try not to obviously make up such ridiculous bs.
>You ever sneak a cucumber next to a cat?Wait are you one of those retards who responds sentence by sentence without reading further rofl? You can't possibly have valid comprehension if that is how you're responding. It's clear you don't.
>Why would a cat ever mistake a cucumber for a snake if it were intelligently designed?It's a called a reflex dummy, it happens faster than full cognition, it's a well designed trait, actually: it's being safe vs sorry.
>Each of those million cats is gonna have a different set of responses for those 1000 items. There might be a lot of similarity in their reactions, but there will still be plenty of variation.None of them will have an avoidance or phobia response. You're just blowing hot air.
