“Also the diversity of life we see now as a result of micro-evolution of the several original kinds over less than 6 thousand years?”
While biologists do draw a distinction between micro-evolution and macro-evolution it really is a distinction without much difference. Or to put it another way, the distinction is a rather artificial one imposed by biologists. The simple answer is that the process at work in macro-evolution is precisely the same one at work in micro-evolution. So to say I believe micro-evolution, but not macro-evolution may sound erudite to the uneducated,…………it is like saying I believe in molecules, but not in atoms, electrons, protons and neutrons. ~ Steve Verdon
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/micro-evolution_vs_macro-evolution/
“You are simply all too willing to give science credit where little if any real proof has been shown. Do you have any idea how many have abandoned their faith due to the teachings of Darwin, evolution, and long ages of the earth and universe?”
Again, this is a logical constraint that must apply even if evolution were true — which is not in doubt, because if we didn’t have ancestors, then we wouldn’t be here. Neither does this mean that fossils exhibiting transitional structures do not exist, nor that it is impossible to reconstruct what happened in evolution. [...]
I am a religious person and I believe in God. I find the militant atheism of some evolutionary biologists ill-reasoned and childish, and most importantly unscientific — crucially, faith should not be subject to scientific justification. But the converse also holds true — science should not need to be validated by the narrow dogma of faith ~ Henery Gee
http://stevereuland.blogspot.com/2006/04/wittlessly-quote-mining.html
I have never lost my faith. I am a Christian and I accecpt the theory of evolution.
The evidence supporting it are simply too strong to ignore.
Macro-evolution (organic evolution) has never been observed. The coding process of DNA simply doesn’t allow for macro changes. Have you researched Mendel’s Law too? Artificial distinction - NOT!
‘Organic evolution, as theorized, is a naturally occurring, beneficial change that produces increasing and inheritable complexity. Increased complexity would be shown if the offspring of one form of life had a different and improved set of vital organs. This is sometimes called the molecules-to-man theory—or macroevolution.
Microevolution, on the other hand, does not involve increasing complexity. It involves changes only in size, shape, or color, or minor genetic alterations caused by a few mutations. Macroevolution requires thousands of “just right” mutations. Microevolution can be thought of as “horizontal” (or even downward) change, whereas macroevolution, if it were ever observed, would involve an “upward,” beneficial change in complexity...
Creationists and evolutionists agree that microevolution (and natural selection) occur. Minor change has been observed since history began. But notice how often evolutionists give evidence for microevolution to support macroevolution. It is macroevolution—which requires new abilities and increasing complexity, resulting from new genetic information—that is at the center of the creation-evolution controversy.’ ~ Dr. Walt Brown PhD
Dr. Brown worked as an evolutionary scientist as well. He simply loved the integrity of science enough to abandon a theory that is full of so many illogical constructs and outright falsifications. His online book is free at www.creationscience.com or can also be purchased in hardback copy for a nominal fee.