quote:
The essence of your demands, skepticfaith... 'Well, that's not what I mean, show me this'... comes down to demanding 10 million years of vertebrate evolution in a 10-day experiment. This is not a realistic demand. And it is not needed to substantiate the validity of evolutionary theory.
I disagree. You should be able to convince me without going back in time. The driving force of evolution is random mutations and natural selection. We cannot observe physical changes in our lifetimes but we must have observed a few random mutations that have been beneficial ..
Are there not any observed mutations at all ? Just give me the links to them whatever they are.
The links you provided are interesting and yes, the last time I read the horse evolution bit I was convinced..
That is until, I started reading stuff like below:
ScienceVsEvolution.com is for sale | HugeDomains
I am not taking one side or the other, but there is a shadow of doubt cast on (macro) evolution - macro meaning large scale evolution between
species - excluding very closely related species. That is why some creationists use the word
kind since some some species are so closely related they are practically the same.