evolution vs. creationism: evolution wins

So why all the "pre-horses"? and where did the "real horses" come from?I think Kathleen Hunt put it well:

Yep. Real science admits mistakes and discards or revises hypotheses and theories, and sometimes it is hard to keep up.Why exactly are you criticising science for revisions? Especially since it was a lack of change in science that you were complaining about a few pages back?

A clarification: Are you stating that there is a single "finch species" and a single "salamander species"?Here's a nice page on salamander diversity to peruse while you think about it. Loss of genetic diversity does not impact the validity of theories of speciation or evolution.Do you think that it does somehow? If so, explain.

xevolutionist -

​

Your entire post save six words can be found word-for-word at this site and others.

​

You are violating forum guidelines, and as many in this thread suspected, are simply parroting Creationist websites.

​

Grow up.

Why did you choose "finch" as your level of cut-off, rather than "birds"? Is a lion a cat? Is a wolf a dog?Are all fish "fish"? Or are there different species of fish? How do you tell them apart?

There is a clear difference between "using quotes" and plagiarism. Funny, if you didn't include that material, your post wouldn't have made sense. Take your time with a few well-written posts, with evidence where required. You'll garner much more respect than posting a multitude of random unresearched statements from creationist websites. The latter technique favors you getting even more respondents, because it is infuriating, and so easy to refute.

They are by my definition. I'm honestly not sure if they are by yours, which is why I asked. Are lions and tigers part of the "cats" species?Are all fish one species? Please reference the experiments that have proven there are limits to evolution, and how they specifically they do so.How do we know where the limits are? What defines them? Where is the limit? How do we know that dogs have "just about reached the limit"? You definitely need to learn the difference between "natural selection" and "artificial selection". Domestic animals cannot be used to make statements regarding evolution. As Crashfrog well-stated above, animal husbandry deals with selection only, while evolution encompasses mutation and selection.You criticized scientists for adding terminology to suit their purpose. Here you've done the same, but with no scientific basis whatsoever. You've simply created the concept of a "limit" to avoid accepting evolution.

How about providing the web address so that we can all take a gander? There are other options, like taxonomy practice is in a state of revision, which isn't neccessarily a negative thing.From my experience, "failure to interbreed under normal conditions" is a fairly standard definition in evolutionary studies of sexually reproducing organisms.

Please reference those experiments - simply mentioning you read "about" them isn't sufficient.You seem to be referring to the limits of selective breeding rather than the limits of evolution. (See multiple above comments regarding the difference).