You said there was a parallel between heliocentrism and Neo-Darwinism. I pointed out why they were not comparable: the movement of the earth around the sun is an observation of present day reality whereas Neo-Darwinism is a deduction from an a priori metaphysical premise. From you we heard "crickets". I then added evidence for the larger point by quoting Colin Patterson. You accused me of quote mining but the fact remains Patterson said what he said. The pattern is always the same: a noted thinker criticizes Neo-Darwinism in a moment of brutal honesty but is bullied into a retraction by the "scientific" establishment. The same thing occurred with Karl Popper, but Popper had plenty of reasons for his criticism of Neo-Darwinism as essentially vacuous and Popper affirmed his original criticism toward the end of his life.
