Scientific Debate: Why I assert that Darwin's theory of evolution is false

[Esquilax]

Rob, with regards to your claim that species only reproduce their own species... please go and read a biology textbook. Because that claim only makes sense if you think evolution means a change in species over a single generation, which it doesn't. The things you accept, the adaptations, small changes within the species, are all that evolution predicts. But don't you think that those small changes will make the eventual result very different from where it started? Say, even a different species? If you walk one step at a time in one direction, you'll eventually walk a mile. It's the same principle with evolution; if you change a little bit every generation, you'll make a new species.

As to evidence of that, we have plenty. We have fairly comprehensive fossil lineages of land dwelling ungulates returning to the sea and evolving into modern day whales. We have fossil evidence of fish leaving the sea and becoming the first tetrapods. We have some cool fossils showing the transition from reptile to early mammals, and so much more I could literally write a book about it here and not be done. The troubling thing this thread shows is that you didn't bother to do any research before you decided to disagree with evolution; you decided that your intuitive, limited grasp of the subject was sufficient to dismiss the work of over a century, by minds that have trained their whole lives to gain an understanding of this field.

I hope that this was merely an honest mistake, that you'll rectify. Evolution is too interesting a subject for yet another mind to be lost to it in favor of fairytales.