"Whenever I describe the details of the functioning of the CV system, it shows how irrational evolution is and you cannot answer."
My goodness, Frank, you're back and it hasn't even been a year yet. And, of course, I have provided many, many answers on this forum
I guess my response to you here "whenever I describe how the CV system could have evolved, you switch the topic to the renal system, or the mammalian diaphragm" or something else because you have no response to science.
If only your buddy Bob was correct, and I were indeed a "pretend professor". Then I'd have oodles of time to pen a detailed response to you statements, which basically consist of describing the human CV system as if it was unique among organisms (which, of course, it is not). I will respond, and it will take me less than a year, but meanwhile I have some other fish to fry --- like dealing with real science instead of trying to swat flies.
1 If evolution were true, we’d expect that organisms would share some similar anatomical structures. (if p then q)
2 Organisms do share some similarity in their anatomical structures. (q)
3 Therefore, evolution is true. (therefore p)
No, Frank, that is not my argument, it's your parody of it. Meanwhile, here is one example of the debates that I have had with you.
Frank. Evolution of the cardiovascular system is impossible because it would be impossible to have an animal that had a double circulatory system with a lung without a divided heart.
Me: Here is are examples of animals living today that have exactly that system. Basal ray-finned fish such as Polypterus (reed fish), Amia (bowfin), Lepisosteus (garpike), and many basal teleosts.
Frank: That's irrelevant because you can't explain how the lung evolved.
I rest my case. But i shall return.
The argument is fallacious because similar anatomical structures are predicted by intelligent design.
Everything is explicable by ID (aka creationism). But as ID/creationism makes no predictions that can be falsified (unlike evolutionary science), it's simply bogus.