Status Updates From Darwin on Trial

It's actually very alarming that a LAWYER wrote a book where I'm only 7 pages in and literally every argument hes made is a logical fallacy and he's presently ignoring the existence of evidence and also conflating Richard Dawkins with the scientific concensus

Yall we are five pages in and we've got:
- appeal to emotion
- appeal to consequence
- inflation of conflict
- false equivocation
- moralistic fallacy

You know what we don't have?

Literally any evidence

I am like four pages in and this guy who was a lawyer BTW has done like 10 different logical fallacies

It's kind of incredible

Alright so this guy sucked but the problem is that a guy who sucks being an advocate of a scientific theory doesn't actually invalidate it in any way

I think there's a term for that fallacy even

Our lawyer author with no science background immediately makes it clear he has no science background by saying this: "Evolution is taught in the public schools (and presented in the media) not as a theory but as a fact"

Scientific theories ARE facts man.

Gravity is a theory also. But you would call me crazy if I suggested that we teach it's equally likely we just hold onto earth real tight with our feet