Ping!
Whenever libtards get caught out they always move the goal posts ... when I talk with my lib friends it’s almost like trying to pick up mercury ....
C’mon!!! I’m a Bills fan - couldn’t you have found a better metaphor than “Wide Right?”
No hidden agenda here..
http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf
http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
http://horsesass.org/?p=3859
Interesting - I often hear now-a-days that Creationists do accept speciation, and thus giving examples of speciation is arguing against a “straw-man”.
http://creationwiki.org/Speciation
http://www.answersingenesis.org/e-mail/archive/answersweekly/2007/0721.asp
and
http://www.icr.org/article/speciation-animals-ark/
“This evidence indicates that most species had a common ancestor from which similar species have descended. This might appear as evolution, but it is not.”
So most species got here via speciation, but it still not evolution - talk about moving goal posts.
Of course, the objection is that speciation can occur, but new “kinds” can’t form... “kinds” are sometimes described as being genera, or families, or even entire orders, depending on who’s asked and when... I’ve noticed over the years that “kinds” is becoming more analogous to larger and larger taxonomic groups. More moving goal posts - or perhaps faint lines in sand.
Most Creationists consider dogs and wolves and being the same kind, yet is there any definition of “species” out there(and there are plenty to pick from) by which wolves and Chihuahuas would NOT be separate species? They are extremely morphologically different (much more so than, say, chimps and humans are) and cannot interbreed (I doubt, even with fancy lab work; I’d love to see pics of such a creature if anyone has them.)