[Modernman]

There is no fossil record that backs up evolution...it's a myth

None? Have you been to a museum lately and seen, for example, skeletons of various horse species starting with cat-sized horses and ending with modern horses? Are those just a coincidence?

I believe VadeRetro has posted, about a million times, a progression of skull samples showing evolution in hominid species.

The problem with creationists a lot of times is that they ask for examples of evolution from A to B to C, but when shown such evidence, they then demand proof of A to A2 to A3 to A4 ad infinitum.

[greenwolf]

None? Have you been to a museum lately and seen, for example, skeletons of various horse species starting with cat-sized horses and ending with modern horses? Are those just a coincidence?

You've been sucked straight in. All of those fossil horses were running around at more or less the same time and there's no way to claim any one of them is older than or ancestral to any other. The only honest thing anybody can say is that there used to be lots of kinds of horses running around and now there are only a few. The idea of a line of descent from small to large is fiction.

[Gerasimov]

and the problem with evolutionists is that they cannot provide A1, A2, and A3. Evolution proposes answers in "billions and billions of years with slight changes." The fossil record should show all these "slight changes" and it does not. What is shows is fossils of similar species going through micro evolution, but no evidence of evolution from one kind to another.

On any account. I have my religion, you have yours. No sense arguing with each other when neither of us will sway. I've been through this exchange too many times and I know the outcome will be the same... you won't convince me and I won't convince you. So lets just shake and go to our corners.