A Logical account of creation

No He didn't. He told (perhaps) some people with very limited understanding of the natural world that over 2500 years ago. What He actually said wasn't written down for centuries.What He has actually written they couldn't read. We now can read what He wrote. We can read it first hand without having oral traditions, translation mistakes and limited background in the physical sciences getting in the way.He hasn't used human tools to write. He doesn't play with brushes and parchment, pens and paper, printing presses or computers to write his message.He wrote his message about how He formed the universe, world and life into the rocks, into the stars and into us. We can read this message directly and He tells us that the old writtings (while ok for the time) are not correct and He is telling you that you are wrong. You now need to learn to read the language He writes in or suffer in ignorance of the message He tries to deliver to you.Edited by NosyNed, : spelling
and sorry to beat Mr. J to the punch.

I was leaving this for someone else to explain to you in simple enough terms but no one seems to have focused on this. I'll have a go and see if you can get it.Gould and Eldridge were talking about transitionals at the level of speciation not at higher levels. They have/had no problem with transitionals between higher groups like orders and classes. Eg. from fish to amphibian or reptile to mammal.Punk Eck (punctuated equilibrium) does NOT support you argument. If you want to use ideas you have to understand them first. You will not get the truth from the creationist web sites that are doing all you thinking for you.Edited by NosyNed, : No reason given.