Again, evolution is still unguided and to assume that something will evolve into an open niche is a gambler's fallacy.
Again, evolution is still unguided and to assume that something will evolve into an open niche is a gambler's fallacy.
Convergent evolution, and history argue against you. C4 photosynthesis evolved independently 60 times. There's no guarantee it will, and I'm not arguing it will. However, the weight of evidence argues that if there's a readily available niche it is a matter of time.
If you argue I won't win the jackpot, you're likely right - in fact I'd put money on my probability of losing. However, if you argue no one will win the jackpot in the next 100 years you're an idiot.
Quit projecting and just stop already, electromagnetic. You can't even bow out and admit you're wrong gracefully, so you skip straight to name calling.
Bravo.
I didn't intend to refer to you personally as an idiot, but turing a phrase however that appears very lost on you.
I'm certain you're just intentionally being a troll, because you're unwilling to make a single basis of an argument or even support your reasoning and can't even use your terms correctly, and now you're attempting to bait me with condescension.