[kpp_kpp]

you won't find me defending creationists trying to use natural science to prove God/the Bible/etc. but I'm not blind to the holes in evolution either.

"On the other hand, accepting that a rare combination of events could occur on occasion to produce a new species still leaves open the 'problem' for evolutionists that there is way too much diversity of life on this planet for such events to account for all of it (or even most of it)."

ironic that the age of the earth has gotten older the more we know about it yet there is still a conflict between what is statistically possible and the current accepted age of the earth (both in the underwhelming number of fossils and the overwhelming variety in the non-extinct species). it is almost as if there is a hidden dispute within evolution between the geological/astronomical determined age and the biological determined age. (ok maybe not so hidden)

[Sofa King]

"ironic that the age of the earth has gotten older the more we know about it yet there is still a conflict between what is statistically possible and the current accepted age of the earth (both in the underwhelming number of fossils and the overwhelming variety in the non-extinct species). it is almost as if there is a hidden dispute within evolution between the geological/astronomical determined age and the biological determined age. (ok maybe not so hidden)"

That dispute is between new-earth creationists and everybody else. Scientists who back the theory of evolution don't have any problem with the current geological estimates of the age of the earth that I've heard of.