Macro and Micro evolution for dummies.

[John V]

So, your argument is that, since this specific example is man-made, the entire process it describes is also man-made. Since the Bible is man-made, we can therefore conclude the same about it?

No, my argument is that, since this example was created by an intelligent designer, it's a poor analogy for evolution.

The color metaphor does not rely on the passage of time to make its point. It uses the gradual shortening of light waves as an analogue to the passage of large amounts of time. Had I made the image myself I would have reversed the colors because the idea of cosmological redshift would have made it a more demonstrable analogy to evolution. Alas.

According to the author, the passage of time is key to the metaphor:

-facedesk- it is supposed to show you that it changes over time, That's evolution in a nutshell, what part of that don't you get. [Emphasis in original]

It only appears lame to you because it demonstrates the absurdity of anti-evolution dogma. I defend it not because of the ideology but because it makes a good point childishly obvious to anyone who isn't stupid or deliberately obtuse.

The impossibility of gradual change is not a part of anti-evolutionary dogma. Creationists understand that a 6-inch snowlfall doesn't mean all six inches at once. (As snowfall is natural, that's another example that would have been better than the one given.) So what?