Does not seem like it could have happened with a single mutation does it?Yep. And if you can't get from a unicellular to a man in one generation, you can't do that at all, either. At any rate, it looks to me to be the same logic....
As a result of all the above, I think it should be pretty clear to those who have an open mind that at no point is there a possibility that the changes necessary to achieve a transformation of the reproductive system from egg laying to mammalian live birth can be achieved in a single generation.
Note, Dan, that despite all you said back in your post 378, gore isn't attacking the mainstream science version of evolution at all. Well, why should he start now for you if he hasn't been persuaded to address the real issues in two years?
In fact, your 378 would make a fine reply to his 425, had he not posted 425 in reply to 378. That's the kind of thing I meant earlier by predicting a non sequitur response. How many times on how many threads have I rebutted a point or answered a question, only to have gore jump in and "rebut" my post with the original point/question I had been addressing?
In Holy War, there is no surrender. When you're out of bullets, you point the gun and yell "Bang!"
Yup, real non sequitur, I directly addressed the issue and showed exactly why you cannot find a single evolutionist writer that will deal with the question of the scientific facts about how a reptile could ever have transformed into a mammal. Facts beat rhetoric every time and your side does not have any facts.