One question for Christians

[Esquilax]

You have never supplied any scriptural evidence period, so I assume the same applies to you. So on the other hand I do provide scriptural proof and you need to do the same to dismiss what I say.

Why would I give the scriptures any credence as a source of information? As an atheist, and as a rational being? You haven't justified your belief that anything in them is true.

I have never made a statement about a magical man and I've given evidence through scripture that what you call genocide is in reality justice. You do not even understand what genocide is.

No, you use words like "divine," and "god's plan" as though that changes the nature of the conversation.

I submit that you find some links that have viable evidence and dump the trash you have been posting.

Keep this in mind, little fool...

So then I'm assuming from what you said that a species can not produce another species, so how does evolution magically come up with other species.

Evolution can produce additional species, it just takes more time; it's not going to be, say, a border collie giving birth to a leopard. Slight genetic variations add up over time, over a timescale of millions of years, until eventually, we're left with a creature that we'd have no choice but to classify as a different species. You know how you look different from your dad? And your kids would look even more different? And so on? It's like that; keep going for millions of generations, and eventually you'll have a person who looks nothing like your dad, but is still undeniably related to him.

You know this is what I referred to above, you're just being dishonest with such answers as above. A wolf is a dog, what did you think a wolf was a donkey. That proves nothing the wolf is still a dog and can breed with other dogs meaning same species. Your explanation is preposterous.

No, a wolf is a canine, but it is not a dog. More than that, as I already explained to you, of course it would be able to breed with genetically similar organisms, how else would it survive?

But let's look at this: you agree that we have multiple breeds of dog, right? Great Danes and Chihuahuas and all kinds in between? And that all of those dogs are, at root, domesticated wolves? All that variation was bred into dogs over millions of years, and that is evolution at work. The species split off, branched from the initial wolf population into large dogs, and small dogs, with such differences that you'd have to be an idiot to declare them all the same.

That's all evolution proposes; changes over time. Starkly different animals, built from a common ancestor.

You've not proven or demonstrated anything, you have a bunch of fossils and no living species.

Did you even read the links I sent you? I think not, because if you did, you would have seen that only the first of the four I posted was of fossils. The rest- that's seventy five percent of the total- was of living, observable examples of evolution. Animals that are actually alive, still evolving, and that you could actually go and see in their natural habitats, if you wanted.

It's interesting how willing you are to brush off any information we give you, but then you accuse us of not being willing to learn. You could at least have done me the common courtesy of opening my links, but I guess it was easier to simply lie about it, wasn't it?

You do not even have a complete fossil they are extremely rare, so everything else is filled in from presupposed ideas of scientists you've never meet and their work has been approved by scientist that practice the same thing. Evolution has be redefined so many times how could anyone know what is meant by the word evolution. It changes every time the need arises to evade and hide the truth, simple really. There is currently, nor has there ever been one species changing into another.

Funny, because I thought the last link- which it's becoming increasingly apparent that you ignored- had eight examples of living creatures on there.

When Christian scientist and other scientist challenged evolution and evolutionary scientist could not defend their position, we saw micro evolution and macro evolution pop up.

Actually, those terms were originally coined to reference the level of evolutionary change, with macroevolution used to describe evolutionary changes in separate gene pools. Most biologists today don't bother to use those terms at all, instead opting to talk about changes in allele frequencies without mentioning the level of change. The term itself was coined in 1927, though, so your timing is entirely out anyway.

Incidentally, since you're so sure that "christian scientists" are challenging evolution so successfully (without mentioning who is challenging or where, interestingly) what do you think of 2005's Kitzmiller vs Dover court case, where evolution won the day and the prominent christian scientist who argued against it was laughed out of court, having been lying on the stand?

To this day not one single bit of evidence has been shown to support macro evolution and micro evolution has not been shown to produce a single new species, except for those who believe that a domesticated dog and wolf are two separate species.

They're just two scales of the same process, seriously. We can prove that microevolution occurs- insofar as I even want to use that term- via simple observation, and macroevolution is just those changes seen over millions of years. Let me ask you: if you take one step, and then another, and then you keep taking steps, will you not eventually walk a mile? That's pretty analogous to macroevolution; your view of this is that small changes can occur, but that those small changes will never accumulate into bigger ones. You're just being absurd.

Also: I gave a link to a concept called ring species, that I wish you'd have read before wasting my time, which is a live action example of this kind of genetic drift, to the point of creating two species of animal that cannot interbreed, despite having started as the same animal.

And again, I note with interest: no evidence from the godschild, but plenty from me...