I 'believe' in Evolution

[Darkstar]

Micro involves using already existing genetic code. For example, the beak a certain species of finch may measure from 2mm to 8mm. If 8mm is best for the seed in the area, eventually all other sizes may be eliminated. This is reducing the genetic pool--specialization, effectively anti-evolution. Macro involves adding new information to the genetic code via random mutation. Macro has never been observed to occur within a probability that does not kill its test species off. Evolution advocates argue that generations are too long to conduct a reasonable experiment on the process. In actuality, experiments have been held on pathogens. Pathogens such as E. coli have some 10,000 generations pass in a couple year span. The scientists of such experiments have found little to no beneficial mutations.

---

---

Evolving an ideally sized beak is anti-evolution? Experiments on bacteria show no beneficial mutations?
You do realize that life has had billions of years to evolve, right? Not to mention that, as you claim the e-coli only developed resistances to things they would never encounter, one can conclude that if they actually encountered these things the trait would evolve faster because more of those without it would die. And you clearly don't know what macro and micro mean.