[Dimensio]

You're right - all arguments have been presented, and still minds aren't changed.

It's not our fault that people don't want to understand the facts.

. I have faced the evidence for macro-evolutionary theory,

The disctinction between "micro" and "macro" evolution are creationist inventions.

big bang,

Irrelevant to evolution.

pontaneous generation,

Also irrelevant to evolution.

and am not buying it.

I'm not surprised, given that you don't seem to have a proper understanding.

But I completely understand where you are coming from on these matters.

Evidently, your understanding is deeply flawed.

[anniegetyourgun]

Right. What can I say...I'm just another one of those that the WashPost calls "poor, uneducated, and easily led." However, despite that, trust me, I do understand your mindset - and you're worldview.

[John O]

a->big bang,

d->Irrelevant to evolution.

a->pontaneous generation,

d->Also irrelevant to evolution.

I disagree D. Eventually evolution demands a first 'thing' that everything evolved from. Where did that first thing come from? (Spontaneous generation?) And where did the materials come from that allowed that first thing to 'spontaneously generate? (Big Bang?)

If the evolutionist scientists deny either of these then they have to come up with another explanation of how life started.

[steve-b]

The disctinction between "micro" and "macro" evolution are creationist inventions.

Yep -- basically, when the evidence for a given line of ancestry becomes so overwhelming that even creationists can't credibly deny it, they reclassify it as "microevolution" so that they can pretend that it "doesn't count" as evidence.

The Klintoon Koolaid drinkers used the same tactic -- they classified their hero's misbehaviors as "not rising to the level of impeachment" ("microdereliction") and "a serious charge if true" ("macroderelection"). Before our very eyes, they reclassified the Monica misadventure and associated perjury from "macrodereliction" (when it was still he said - she said) to "microdereliction" (after the blue dress surfaced). They might have been taking lessons from the creationists who similarly fast-shuffled the Eohippus --> Equus line from "macroevolution" (when the fossil record was still spotty) to "microevolution" (once the fossil record had been filled in more or less exactly as predicted).