(April 21, 2017 at 1:58 pm)DarkerEnergy Wrote: There you go, there's a few 'icons' of natural selection that are very recent in history, and very much examples of significant evolution. We can go further but my hunch is, you really don't know what you're talking about at all, and it's waste of time to proceed.
I go with the consensus opinion of biologists while at the same time recognizing the Neo-Darwin synthesis has been called into question by a group of small but seemingly well-qualified dissenters. I don't have a dog in that fight precisely because I do not feel I have sufficient background knowledge to take a side and it doesn't affect my theology even though I find the extended evolution model fascinating. My point was that many AF proponents of the Neo-Darwin Synthesis relying on obsolete 'icons' or self-serving internet searches every bit as much as the proponents of ID or creationism. Your strident reply suggests as much.