[Codeflier]

You are wrong about that. Evolution based on genetic mutation can easily be shown in the lab and it is repeatable. If you take a strain of some bacteria that is susceptible to an antibiotic and subject it to that antibiotic you will find that you can generate bacteria that over time have resistance to the antibiotic. This occurs because on average there is an error every 10 to the 6th times in base pair replication. Such mutations on very large scales over time create organisms with entirely new genes and capabilities.

I will never understand the complete animosity to evolution. Evolution directed by God to me is much more beautiful than a literal interpretation of Genesis, which should be considered an allegory for evolution.

[Westbrook]

> If you take a strain of some bacteria that is susceptible
> to an antibiotic and subject it to that antibiotic you will
> find that you can generate bacteria that over time have
> resistance to the antibiotic.

So, was there any new information created in the DNA, or was information that made the bacteria susceptible lost?

Was the bacteria anything other than bacteria after the experiment?

And after tens of thousands of generations of mutated fruit flies, did we ever get anything other than a fruit fly?

This is just a microbiology repeat of the long discredited “Pepper Moth” case for evolution.

I used to be an evolutionist, but the evidence against it is simply too abundant and compelling.

If you’re curious ...
see http://www.icr.org/
and http://creation.com/

[ontap]

Evolutionist bring this on themselves when they push evolution as a scientific alternative to creationism. While it is an alternative to creationism the science of it doesn't ad up...yet!!! When scientist states that his theory goes against any probability put states he believes it non the less that is not science.

[painter]

I will never understand the complete animosity to evolution. Evolution directed by God to me is much more beautiful than a literal interpretation of Genesis, which should be considered an allegory for evolution.

You might get flamed over this,but I agree with you on this.

[allmendream]

Not only is there an intrinsic rate of error in copying DNA - one times ten to the sixth power - there is also within bacteria a gene for an “error prone” DNA polymerase that is even MORE susceptible to creating error?

This error prone DNA polymerase to copy DNA is expressed instead of the usual high fidelity DNA polymerase when the bacteria is experiencing high stress?

Now why would an organism even HAVE an error prone DNA polymerase gene?

And why would it be expressed during times of high stress?

The theory of evolution through natural selection of genetic variation has an answer.

Creationism, as is usual, has nothing that is of any use.