[Ichneumon]

If you're not claiming that a species can make a dramatic change into a completely different species over time, then what are you claiming?

I think he's objecting to your "dramatic change" phrasing. While the end result XX million years down the road may look "dramatically" different from its distant ancestor, the phrase "dramatic *change*" sounds too much like the folks who expect that if evolution were true it would have to work by at some point having "a fish give birth to an elephant" or somesuch.

The actual *change* at any given point (i.e. generation to generation) is actually not very "dramatic" at all. It's only in the long run that all the smaller changes accumulate to the point of something "dramatically" modified from where it may have started.

[Jaysun]

It's only in the long run that all the smaller changes accumulate to the point of something "dramatically" modified from where it may have started.

Ichneumon,
Here's what I said, "What proof do we have that a species can make a dramatic change into a completely different species over any period of time, no matter how long?"

He disagrees with that. To me, simply tossing time (no matter how much) into the equation doesn't solve the problem. Sure, you don't claim that we went from one to the next overnight, but is the supposed transformation from plant to beast any less astounding just because it didn't happen in a short period of time?

[houeto]

sounds too much like the folks who expect that if evolution were true it would have to work by at some point having "a fish give birth to an elephant" or somesuch.

Naaa...just looking for evidence of something that is classified as both plant and animal.