2) THIS: Even today there is a great deal of potential for marked variation in a single generation (and there was undoubtedly much more 6,000 years ago). For example, a British couple with medium skin tone recently had twins, one with dark skin and the other with light.
.....is a BOLD FACED DECEPTION. The parents of these twins were bi-racial, they had white mothers and black fathers and they retain the genes from both parents, expressed or not....that means they pass on the genes from their parents to their kids...expressed or not....so, as you can read futher along than the unscientific author of this POS article wants you to: "It's not truly a pure black parent with a pure white parent. You had both parents who are already mixed racially so that when they go back together you can get both extremes," .
The author sure can dupe the willing, but anyone that's EVER taken a simple Genetics class would understand the deception.
Just because there are OTHER things that affect a population.....does not discount the ToE. We, as the People of the United States have changed in appearance too, as we're taller now as a population in large part due to a better diet. That doesn't mean that The ToE is invalid.
Selective quoting rounds out the deception. The author forgot this part: "......the patterns of variation within and between populations are too different to be explained by genetic drift alone."
That means that genetic drift is ALSO part of the reason.....but that other factors can ALSO be a part of the whole story.
....and once again "Evos unwittingly wind up supporting creation AGAIN".....you couldn't be further from the truth.
The sky appears blue...."see Evos are once again proving creation"
==....”see Evos are once again proving creation”
They really have no choice in the matter. They are, after all, studying God’s creation, whether they want to admit it or not. As such, the data is creationist data by definition.