Re: 95894

- "When you can think of a good explanation for the facts, I'll be here."

Not worth it... You have not presented any "facts" either. For someone that throws the word "fact" around so liberally, I would have expected at least one "fact" to be presented by now. ERVs may be a "fact", however in and of themselves do not prove evolution at all. What "attempts" to prove evolution is evolutionary science's interpretation of ERVs; FAR from "fact".

- "You didn't offer anyting at all. An opinion based on magical, pseudoscience mechanism that have not been observed."

Not true... actually it is an understanding brought about by studying retrovirus work in various fields of study... not just a single field of work with an agenda (they all have an agenda); evolution in this case.

- "This happens all the time and those who succeed in presenting good, verifiable work end up with Nobel prizes and lauded by the scientific community. "

The Nobel prize does not make the theory or Science correct... in fact, it is most often awarded with a strong business (read potential for $$$$) and political influence that makes the prize nearly worthless in my opinion.

Junk science?

"Junk science" is faulty scientific data and analysis used to advance special and, often, hidden agendas. The junk Science "mob" includes:

* The MEDIA may use junk Science for sensational headlines and programming. Some members of the media use junk science to advance their and their employers' social and political agendas.

* PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS may use junk science to bamboozle juries into awarding huge verdicts. Large verdicts may then be used to extort even greater sums from deep-pocket businesses fearful of future jury verdicts.

* SOCIAL ACTIVISTS, such as the "food police," environmental extremists, and gun-control advocates, may use junk science to achieve social and political change.

* GOVERNMENT REGULATORS may use junk science to expand their authority and to increase their budgets.

* BUSINESSES may use junk science to bad-mouth competitors' products or to make bogus claims about their own products.

* POLITICIANS may use junk science to curry favor with special interest groups or to be "politically correct."

* INDIVIDUAL SCIENTISTS may use junk science to achieve fame and fortune.

* INDIVIDUALS who are ill (real or imagined) may use junk science to blame others for causing their illness.


http://junkscience.com/define.html


- "And you failed to present one example of such a virus."

I will not hold your hand and do the research for you... if you want to know the truth, go after it. I will get you started... years ago the first reports stated retro-like viruses in plants... then more recently they were questioning, retroviruses in plants? Now they are finding them...

How does denying them affect your argument?

quite honestly the picture is quite clear to those that would study the whole rather than a "part".

get busy... I am still waiting for a "fact" to be presented by you as well :-)

grz-

Tweet