Evolution isn't complicated in principle; where you have accrued genetic differences from one generation to another and there are according variances in survival, evolution will simply follow. You have, and there are, so it does. There's really no room for discussion on the matter.
But of course, feel free to continue being wrong.
Aside from the politics in the thread, very interesting reading! Thanks Nicko
Everyone is in agreement over micro-evolution.
Everyone is not in agreement over macro-evolution.
The words changed colour (micro-evolution).
The words didn't become books (macro-evolution).
How are you missing the point that micro evolution and macro evolution are exactly the same thing?
You are incapable of accepting this, not because it's a flawed notion, but because you have decided, before the fact, that macro evolution is impossible (by way of trying to define it as something it is not).
Your comment about books is a strawman, a distraction that is entirely irrelevant to the point being made in the image I posted.
The different colours represent 'macro' evolution, and the gradation between the colours demonstrates how 'macro' evolution is simply a lot of 'micro' evolution piled up.
No. Macro-evolution is not impossible. It is, however, unobserved.
Macro-evolution could be micro-evolution piled up, or it could be not. It is thus an assumption on your part.
To insist micro and macro-evolution is the same thing is disengenious on your part. You are just reinforcing the ambiguity surrounding the theory of evolution and confusing guys, like the OP, who doesn't differentiate between the two, and thus doesn't reason clearly.
If you want to categorise something as being disingenuous it is the hackneyed creationist tactic of simply redefining macroevolution as evolution to an extent great enough that it has not been, and practically cannot have been, directly observed. Your tack on the matter is hardly surprising.
So for those that say the world isn't 4.x billion years old ... What do you think t is?
Jägermeiʃter can fix that!
Is it just me or are Christians getting dumber? Compared to the posters in this thread Ekstasis was a frikin genius.
IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND EVOLUTION, DO A COUPLE OF GOOGLE SEARCHES. READ 20 ARTICLES, NOT THE ONE POSTED BY A BRAIN DEAD TRUTH BURYING CHRISTIAN SOCIETY OF DENIALISTS.
I'm also interested in why they disagree with all the science, even if they have no clue about it. Why would there be some big conspiracy, what are the "evil scientists" trying to achieve by making up mountains of evidence that the earth is over 4 billion years old, or where the different forms of life we have come from. What do they have to gain?
So y'all need to hide yo uzis, hide yo assault rifles and hide yo bazookas 'cos they disarmin' everybody out here!
Because to accept evolution, means to accept that man is just another animal, not special (although religion and evolution can be and are reconciled by billions of religious people), unique and hand-crafted by god.
I guess some people find this notion uncomfortable.