[Aric2000]

You can't be serious, speciation? what the hell?

They never claimed speciation, it was MICROEVOLUTION!!

Hello G3K, earth to G3K, hello, anybody home?

Because the pollution made the background darker, the darker Moths reproduced MORE then the Light colored moths, because they were not eaten as much.

HELLO G3K, EARTH to G3K!!!

There was NO Phony, about it, they made their point and it was a good one.

But then again, facts never get in your way, do they?

You are back on ignore, had to set the record straight on your BS again.

[Dimensio]

Gore3000 has been told this before. Gore3000, however, continues to repeat the claim without providing any evidence for it because he is a shameless liar. Gore3000 even accused me of claiming never to have heard of the study, when really I had only claimed that I'd never heard of the study being used as speciation. Gore3000 has never apologized for falsely accusing me of lying, because gore3000 is a coward and a liar.

[gore3000]

You can't be serious, speciation? what the hell?

They never claimed speciation, it was MICROEVOLUTION!!

Whatever they claimed it was a lie and a fraud. There was no mutation, at most there was a change in the amount of spotted moths over white moths - but we can't be sure because the so called 'scientist' who spent years following the moth was a fraud. This is not speciation, not micro-evolution, not macro-evolution, not evolution at all. It is nothing except an example of the desperation of evolutionists in finding any living proof for their theory.