[mike182d]

When you say we see species pop up, we are not meaning over two months we mean over hundreds of thousands or millions of years. In evolutionary terms this is fast. Honestly friend, your anti-intellectualism will destroy your great country.

Let us suppose that a future generation millions of years from now digs up a 1965 Mustang and then a 2005 Mustang. They then go on to deduce, given their limited knowledge of the past, that since the two cars are nearly identical in structure and chemical make-up that one must have come from the other "naturally" by means of "evolution." I think you would write this off as preposterous and rightfully so. The history of species as portrayed by evolution is equally proposterous.

We find animals with similar DNA and structure and then conclude that they must have come from each other. Why?

[MineralMan]

"Let us suppose that a future generation millions of years from now digs up a 1965 Mustang and then a 2005 Mustang. They then go on to deduce, given their limited knowledge of the past, that since the two cars are nearly identical in structure and chemical make-up that one must have come from the other "naturally" by means of "evolution." "

When automobiles begin to reproduce, then we can discuss your comparison.

[orionblamblam]

> Let us suppose that a future generation millions of years from now digs up a 1965 Mustang and then a 2005 Mustang.

Are you still totting out that old nonsense?

Fine. Point to the mechanism whereby a 1965 Mustang can reproduce itself. Until you do that, your analogy is an intentional falsehood meant to deceive.

[WildTurkey]

They then go on to deduce, given their limited knowledge of the past, that since the two cars are nearly identical in structure and chemical make-up that one must have come from the other "naturally" by means of "evolution."

No. They have an entirely different running gear. Not even close in structure.