Ankerberg ignores the variations we already know about in DNA.
NO ONE knows how many variations original DNA had, it is entirely possible that two white people can have a Negro child, and not have cheated on each other.
It is only recently that we had genetic isolation, where dominant genes tend to dictate blond hair in Scandanavians, black skin in Africans, and different eyes in Asia
NONE of that is macro evolution, it is just variation in dna and also genetic isolation of donors
Different animals coming from an original pair is quite possible, look at the different number of housecats, dogs, cows, elephants, fish, birds: each is distinct in their look, but many of those species can trace back to a single pair if there was genetic differences in the first place in the original DNA
No one looks alike, do they? No dogs look alike, do they?
DNA variation.
[[Ankerberg ignores the variations we already know about in DNA.]]
And he also ignores that htese variations happen very very quickly and can account for species rapidly diverging/devolving to result in species within their own kinds that look dramatically different- but alas- Ackenburg apparently prefers not to upset the proverbial macroevolutionary apple cart- too many confrontaitons for him to stand up to apparently