[[You are simply lying. Every phenomenon or process required for evolution is routinely observed and manipulated by experiment.]]
Lying? lol- no sir- you are lying- MICROEvolution is observed and tested- NOT MACROEvolution Infact testing has proven just the opposite- that MACROEvolution is biologically not possible. Again we go back to the NEW information and NEW organs systems etc. Genetic variation is nothign but MICROEvolution—We’re going in circles here- I stand by what I’ve said because quite frankly it relies on factual observable science and NOT on assumptions and unsupported pressupositions. MACROEvolution is STILL a theoretical Pressuposition and nothign more.
[[You are simply lying. Every phenomenon or process required for evolution is routinely observed and manipulated by experiment.]]
Let me just expand my response to more fully address your accusation- Words matter JS- Every phenomena and process has NOT been observed- MACROEvolution requires NEW ifnormation laterally transfered between different KINDS so that one kind receives NEW non-species specific information This has NOT been observed in hte wild EXCEPT between the same KINDS only htrough lab generated gentic manipulation and under ideal conditions conducive to the manipulations can interspecies lateral gene transference occure AND, and this is important, AND, the species receiving the leteral infromation has several layers of built in protections preventing it from perverting it beyond species specific upper limits- AS WELL, the simple transference material does nothign to move the species beyond it’s own KIND, it simply becomes a host and correction mechanisms immediately kick in to begin correcting hte mistake.
And once again you are wrong.
Macroevolution is species-level change. Everyone agrees with that.
And there are some living examples of that change. They are called ring species. And the really neat thing about ring species is that the transitional or intermediate forms are still living and can be readily examined!
Now I know you can't accept any of this--it goes against your religious belief, but don't try to con others into thinking you either know anything, or care, about science. Its dishonest.
Now, to 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
See also: Ring Species: Unusual Demonstrations of Speciation, by Darren E. Irwin, for a longer discussion of this topic.