This may come as a shock to you — BUT - evolution could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in court — if it is a «Law»
of science and not a
theory explain to me why Scientist in the same field have differing opinions theory has undergone massive changes since the 1850's when Darwin first came up with the THEORY — there are a lot of interesting similarities to true science which makes it sound so plausible, but it should sound good — After all the top scientist / humanists in the world promote it and they are all pretty
theory explain to me why Scientist in the same field have differing opinions
theory has undergone massive changes since the 1850's when Darwin first came up with the THEORY — there are a lot of interesting similarities to true science which makes it sound so plausible, but it should sound good — After all the top scientist / humanists in the world promote it and they are all pretty
theory has undergone massive
changes since the 1850's when Darwin first came up with the
THEORY — there are a lot of interesting similarities to true science which makes it sound so plausible, but it should sound good — After all the top scientist / humanists in the world promote it and they are all pretty
THEORY — there are a lot
of interesting similarities to true science which makes it sound so
plausible, but it should sound good — After all the top scientist / humanists in the world promote it and they are all pretty smart
Commenting on criticism
of the Lavoisier Group by Clive Hamilton, the Cooler Heads Coalition notes that «Hamilton accuses the Lavoisier Group
of painting the UN's global warming negotiations as «an elaborate conspiracy in which hundreds
of climate scientists have twisted their results to support the climate
change theory in order to protect their research funding» and adds, «Sounds
plausible to us.»