Re: TOBS: Yet another Budikkka hole: the Reptile/Mammal Colossal Hole

Still waiting for a list of these colossal holes, Jabriol.  Been
waiting since late August.  Not holding my breath.

THIS
IS
A
LIST
CONSISTING
OF
THE
WORDS
IN
THESE
TWO
SENTENCES.
GET
IT
NOW?

Now can you do it?  I am not asking you to detail or define them or
provide evidence or justification, all I am asking you to do is list
the specific holes.  You don't even have to number them.  I understand
that it is kinda hard to number a list which contains no items.

Notes to help you out:
Comparisons of modern reptiles and modern birds are irrelevant, since
no evolutionists has ever claimed that either one descended from the
other one.

Blind assertions that there are no transitional forms do not work when
the talk.origins transitional FAQ has been repeatedly pointed out to
you, nor are your blind assertions that t.o. isn't peer-reviewed
relevant, for two reasons:

1.  You have offered not a shred of peer-reviewed evidence to support
a single thing you have claimed and so are hypocritical to demand it.

2.  The t.o. FAQ on transitionals contains over 70 references, many of
which **are** to science papers published in peer-reviewed
publications, so (as usual)
you are a liar for making the claim in the first place.

Poorly referenced or unreferenced allusions to creationist letters
that are published as a courtesy in New Scientist magazine are not the
same as a peer-reviewed paper published in a professional refereed
science journal.

Fifty year old arguments from incredulity don't count.

Moving the goal posts does not count.

Desperately snipping material that you cannot answer does not count.

Any response to this that does not include a **LIST** of these
colossal holes is a direct and public admission that there are no such
holes and you have lied about them for weeks.  Have you grasped this?

Budikka