DARWIN'S MACROEVOLUTION: Why Unscientific?

[libalchris]

---

What exactly do you call this then?


Instead of getting your education from garbage creationist sites, try reading from more credible sources.

http://talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

And please... PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF BLAKE LIVELY... STOP trying to separate micro-evolution from macro-evolution. While they are legitimate scientific terms, scientists make no distinction between the two when it comes to Evolution. You can't have one without the other.

Do you honestly think that scientists believe an Ape shot out a human magically one day?

Back to transitional fossils, no matter how complete the fossil record becomes (it will never even be close to complete and I have a feeling that you don't understand how fossilization works), creationists will ALWAYS say there are none. You creationists would even make some wild excuse up if a Crocaduck really did exist and we found the fossil to prove it.

Let me ask you something... do you have kids? I want you to show me a picture of your child the exact moment he/she TRANSITIONED from baby to toddler. Go ahead, I'll wait for it.

---

You don't understand. Alter2Ego is cheating. You could show her a lineup of a million fossils detailing every single tiny change from one species to another and she'd still deny it. Why? Because she could say "they're only similarities, it doesn't prove anything." I know that because that's what she's doing now. We not only show a lineup of many transitional forms, but we also explain that they're in the right order in the geological column, that they share proper homologies, and more, and she still says "it's just similarities." She's doing this because she isn't capable of doing anything but virtually quoting creationist sources, she doesn't understand what she's saying. The way she described "homology theory" is how I hear it described in every creationist source. Creationists don't understand that homology is more than just similarities, it's similarities where you expect them to be as predicted by the theory of evolution even if there's no reason a designer would think to make it homologous (The homology in bat's wings, dolphin fins, and human hands for example,) and lack of similarities where you DON'T expect them (like mammals don't have a structure homologous to bird feathers)