Originally Posted by
GIBHOR
thats micro evolution, not macro evolution. macro evolution is evolution above species......
As far as I can tell, this is just a modified "god of the gaps" kind of argument, which relies on time being long and human life being short.
Tell me if I'm wrong: the argument USED to be that micro evolution was real, but no one had ever seen one species evolve into a new species. (Forget that there's lots of evidence besides watching something happen in front of one's eyes.)
Then those dang scientists had to go and create experiments so that they could watch short-lived life forms evolve in new directions and form new species. Darn them!
So the new argument is that, well, okay, one species can evolve in a way that creates a new species, but it CAN'T CAN'T CAN'T evolve so much that a descendent could be a new genus! This argument is totally solid, they think, because the amount of time that would take is too long and besides, by the time scientists have observed evolution that far, they'll have brand new arguments that ignore all the evidence that doesn't happen in front of their eyes.
Did I miss anything?