<< >But I agree there is plenty of evidence for evolution. I'm simply
interested
>in the pattern of data involved with evolution. And in this case, your
>claim that there "has been an increase in complexity throughout
>geologic time" only seems to be true with a very restricted perspective.
>As I mentioned before, it's like trying to argue the exception proves
>the rule.
Glenn:
>Cellular types is NOT an exception. If you have a better measure of
>complexity than cellular types, please present it. But as I see your
>argument now, it is merely a case of I won't accept this as a measure with
>no suggestion as to what to replace it with. Surely you would agree that
>an animals with 200 cell types is more complex than an animal with 2,
>wouldn't you?
Glenn, I am not questioning any measurement. The exception has to do
with your claim about complexity increasing throughout geologic time.
This is a claim that only seems to be true if one restricts their focus to
a very small subset of lineages.
Mike