"Science v Religion"

[Esquilax]

Okay, i didn't think I had to (EDIT: i.e. refer to an evolutionary article), but here it is then: click here, and this is pretty much what I was taught anyway (I chose the link because it is answering our exact question in every-day language). So I'll put what I said in another way: the extrapolations are based on reasonable evidence- and can be traced back to common ancestors, etc... but IF (note the 'if') God exists, then whatever the extrapolations would give for the 6,000 year mark is the animals that God would have created. Do you see what I'm saying? God would have the created the exact animals that evolution would give for 6,000 years ago.
when you step off a cliff, you know you're going to fall; it's based on heaps of observed evidence. This is like evolution. you might ask the next question- 'where is the ground' (i.e. when did life start?). BUT Whether or not you reach terminal velocity before hit the ground- you know that gravity exists!!!
This is like what I was suggesting- just as we will probably fall when we step off a cliff, creatures (including us) are probably evolving. But just because you didn't reach terminal velocity doesn't mean that gravity has been disproved! Likewise, just because God started it all 6,000 years ago doesn't mean that he is contradictory with evolution!

Oh, I know what you meant. The problem with it is that we can trace the lineages back further than six thousand years.

Oh, and that evolution works at a much, much longer timescale than thousands of years, that's a problem with your theory too. The differences on animals if the totality of life was created a few thousand years ago would be drops in the bucket, nothing compared to the diversity the actual fossil record shows.