I created an account here with the sole purpose of seeing how evolutionists can resolve the following problem with their theory:
My issue: Selection (either natural selection or human breeding programs) produces a life form that is more adapted or specialized, but is genetically less complex than the original.
-Example: You can take a population of wolves and through breeding recreate all the dog breeds we see today. You can never take dogs and breed them back into wolves. The genetic data has been lost in favor of specializations. Dogs are Genetically less complex than wolves in that they only have the data for their particular breed and do not contain the data for all dog breeds the way the wolf does.
So if all species are undergoing selection, how can anything be said to be "evolving"? Seems to me that everything is in a state of genetic decay. Now it's decay with a good purpose, to continue the species in an environment that is constantly changing, but the end result is a loss of genetic information.
Can evolutionists provide ANY examples of natural selection creating a genetically more complex life form than the original? If not, how can you say that selection leads to evolution and not devolution?