The Invalidation of Big Words

"As usual, your comments on evolution show that you are ignorant or delusional on matters that are open to objective investigation, which does not strike me as a reason for confidence in your subjective impressions...You've never addressed the whole question of shared, identically-disabled pseudogenes in humans and other primates, or shared ERVs (well, you have: you've indicated your subjective sense that any argument that uses 'big words' must be invalid). You've never defined what a 'transitional fossil' ought to look like, so that you could tell whether or not any existed." Steven J.

I think it's unfair of you to say that I believe that any argument that uses big words must be invalid. The use of large words has a place and can sound impressive, but its important to be cognizant of the fact that the most brilliant of teachers has the ability to keep it simple. He who sounds impressive but leaves his hearers without understanding is thunder without lightning. He leaves his hearers in the dark.

Nowadays, any fool (such as myself) can string big words together to impress and deceive the simple. All he needs is a thesaurus.

Most believers in evolution suffer from the disease of superfluity. They think that they are wise as they expound a nebulous and scientifically baseless theory as if it was truth. They are clouds without rain.

P.s. I don't believe, as you do, that humans are primates. How insulting...to primates.