>>20981816I didn't assume it was an attack, I just wondered. You really couldn't put it past them at this point - the entire field of creationism is blatant misunderstandings of things science and evidence have come up with, why not one more? I would have been fine giving this one bonus points, actually, because I had never heard the argument used before and the image is at very least well done.
Maybe somewhere, some creationist is looking at this image right now and it will be used as support for anti-evolution agenda in the next big debate. It couldn't be worse than bananas.
