If evolution is not the answer, then what is?

Hello, RH
Maybe I've spent long on sites like this. You're being unfair there are lots of creationist answers for this . In fact there seems to be one or more of them for every individual creationist.And once they start to articulate one it changes into something else faster than "kinds" were supposed to have evolved after the flood. What you want is something coherent. Lots of luck.

That's off topic, RH, if you want to answer could you make under a geology or flood topic?

6days:
Lots of words. Not much content on the discussion at hand.How about this exchange:

quote:

---

And, according to AIG, at least one evolutionist organization has admitted that AIG is correct.
---

​

Fascinating. Can you name them? Did they say AiG was correct about one piece of evidence they presented, or did they say AiG was correct about everything they say, in which case I guess that evolutionist organization is no longer evolutionist? Can you give us some details?

---

Well, could you give us more details? Please and thanks. That would be interesting.

Yea, me too. I like to think I have a creative imagination but it's got to be some kind of strech to get from Hawkings level of astrophysics to evolution.mmm, come to think of it, there have been a number of creationists that have insisted that the big bang is part of evolutionary theory. A bit like saying that bridge engineering is.