3 ms·

If evolution isn't producing cancer in infants, what is? Your debate approach of declaring my position to be the opposite of what I say is no fun. I'm not goin

• DoctorOetker 3y ago
  > If evolution isn't producing cancer in infants, what is? See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_education for one of many contributing causes. Regardless of the myriads of contributing causes producing such cancers, natural selection eliminates these cancers, especially fatal childhood cancers. > Your debate approach of declaring my position to be the opposite of what I say is no fun. I'm not going to continue. The fact that I deduce a statement from your position which contradicts another of your positions is not a bad debate approach but simply an example of the principle of explosion. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion That is what happens if you build a strawman: you pretend my argument relies merely on "the existence of a property" ignoring that occurence rates and probabilities actually span a spectrum, from marginally close to the impossible 0% to marginally close to a 100% certain. If the capability to emote bitterness is nearly universal among a species then it is a trait, not "existence of a property".