Nor am I ‘ticked off’ by you. As I recognize you as someone (who is like what I once was) who has not considered any/all of the creation science evidence nor any/all of the other 100+ natural clocks indicating less than millions and billions of years. See my links page.
I must say though claiming all lifeforms are transitional is simply the last straw for a desperate theory still trying to hang on. Anyone who is not math-challenged can easily see enough negative mutations will accumulate and render the species extinct far before even one tenth of 1% of the genome mutates favorably. And in conjunction w/ Haldane you must have a pair copy the exact same sexually-related mutations and find each other in order to re-produce this ‘new’ species.
Can you demonstrate ANY species that has EVER gone extinct due to accumulation of “negative” mutations? Do you think Creation “scientists” could do an experiment and show how this would work in the laboratory?
When a bacteria is under stress it begins to express an error prone DNA polymerase instead of the usual high fidelity DNA polymerase. This error prone DNA polymerase introduces more changes in the DNA every time the bacteria reproduces.
So why would a population of bacteria WITH error prone DNA polymerase survive better than a population of bacteria WITHOUT that gene?
Why would they have that gene and why would they express it during times of stress?
If accumulation of “negative” mutations is going to lead to the extinction of the bacterial population according to your ludicrous “model” - why would there even BE a gene for error prone DNA polymerase?
“you must have a pair copy the exact same sexually-related mutations and find each other in order to re-produce this ‘new’ species”
A highly significant argument. If a refutation can be found by the opposition, I’d like to see it.