I have a hard enough time beliving micro evolution, but supposedly it happens...
Macro evolution is a farce, I’ll never accept it.
ID is not science. Plain and simple, not science.
I think you should sit your kids down and tell them what YOU belive, and why.
Nuff said.
Yep, spend an hour or two doing that, and have their "teachers" spend 14,000 seat hours teaching them that their faith is false.
You can easily see it all around you. You differ from your parents, do you not? That is "microevolution."
Macro evolution is a farce, I’ll never accept it.
Your acceptance is not required. Science will get along just fine in spite of your sullen disbelief.
But there is fine evidence for "macroevolution" out there. There are several known examples of what are called ring species.
Ring species provide unusual and valuable situations in which we can observe two species and the intermediate forms connecting them. In a ring species:
- A ring of populations encircles an area of unsuitable habitat.
- At one location in the ring of populations, two distinct forms coexist without interbreeding, and hence are different species.
- Around the rest of the ring, the traits of one of these species change gradually, through intermediate populations, into the traits of the second species.
A ring species, therefore, is a ring of populations in which there is only one place where two distinct species meet. Ernst Mayr called ring species "the perfect demonstration of speciation" because they show a range of intermediate forms between two species. They allow us to use variation in space to infer how changes occurred over time. This approach is especially powerful when we can reconstruct the biogeographical history of a ring species, as has been done in two cases. Source
ID is not science. Plain and simple, not science.
On this we can agree.