Creation vs. Evolution (1 Viewer)

[FatMax]

what about the second law of thermodynamics? Something about how things will decay if lieft to themselves...

A classic..THIS IS NOT THE SECOND LAW OF THERMO

lolIt only goes downhill if you quote a scientific law by starting with "Something about".

 

[larry_boy_44]

4 reasons to believe fire-breathing "dragon" or dinasour existed:1. the Bible says it2. the legends of fire-breathing dragons

:rotflmao: :rotflmao:

I like that #3 is 'it's possible'

did you look up the animal I spoke of in #3??It shoots fire...actually, it shoots fire out of its butt, but the place it shoots it out of doesn't matter...

 

[shining path]

what about the second law of thermodynamics? Something about how things will decay if lieft to themselves...Well, I think it is safe to say that everything was left to itself when "life" was created "billions" of years ago if evolution is true... so how did it do something other than decay? Or is life really decaying non-life?

Look up. That big glowing circle in the sky should tell you where some of the energy comes from. The earth is not a closed system unto itself.

so, as soon as the sun shone on the earth life started???but, the second law of thermodynamics knows about the sun, and things still decay now...

Larry, even mainstream creationists aren't using these kinds of arguments any more. Google "intelligent design" to see the state of the art.

 

[larry_boy_44]

I'm no atheist.. but those atheists in this thread are not arguing that there isn't a God.. they are simply refuting the idea that the Ark really housed all those animals, etc..

While, this may be true, they are implicitely mocking his beliefs. This goes back to a thread a while back about athiests converting believers. Same names appear...

No, we're mocking his attempted use of science to show proof of something that requires faith. Check bigbottom's post awhile back. Larry doesn't need to prove this to us or anyone.

It seems to me, as such fans of science, that should at least hear his attempt before frothing at the mouth with witty retorts. He had hardly started before the wolves came in. Maybe how copernicus felt?

Two of his arguments are DRAGONS AND THE LOCH NESS MONSTER.

yeah, and you in your closed mindedness didn't even listen...actually think about this stuff...what in human myth is not even BASED on reality?

 

[Lonesome Dove]

8 foot beavers

Smoo?

 

[Jayrok]

From science we learned that, in x number of years, the Earth will no longer be able to support life. Another theory says that the Sun, from which we get all of our energy, will implode into itself, also in y number of years, hence creating a black hole which will suck up everything around it. So whether it is in x years or y years, we are doomed. There is an end.Also from science, we know people of history were smart enough to figure out astronomy. So, based on science and astronomy, it's possible somone in history figured this out long before written history. Perhaps they said it in a different way, that a fire breathing dragon will come along and swallow the Earth, but the idea is the same.Then how hard would it be for this person to write a book that says the World will come to an end and have everyone believe it?

good post..Many believe that most religions, even christianity, was derived from astrology. They can show you how the life of Jesus is simply a metaphoric journey of the sun traveling through our solar system. Jesus is the Sun.. the "light of the world".. There are websites that demonstrate this.. is it true? who knows, but it's awfully coincedental..

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

it shoots fire out of its butt

I've done this.

 

[larry_boy_44]

also, compare these dinosaurs to modern lizards:frilled dragons to the spitters from JP (I dont' remember what hey're called)iguanas to iguanadonsthere are a few others, too... *doesn't remember them, I can only write notes so fast*

 

[1586]

what about the second law of thermodynamics? Something about how things will decay if lieft to themselves...Well, I think it is safe to say that everything was left to itself when "life" was created "billions" of years ago if evolution is true... so how did it do something other than decay? Or is life really decaying non-life?

Look up. That big glowing circle in the sky should tell you where some of the energy comes from. The earth is not a closed system unto itself.

so, as soon as the sun shone on the earth life started???but, the second law of thermodynamics knows about the sun, and things still decay now...

Larry, even mainstream creationists aren't using these kinds of arguments any more. Google "intelligent design" to see the state of the art.

Does posting under 2 different names in the same thread often confuse people?

 

[Mr. Anonymous]

And this argument (assuming there is some linear connection between the "premises" rolling off the printing presses here in this thread) is convincing enough people to actually lead to changes in biology teaching in schools??????? I got tired after reading one of the first ones: "We should notice at this fact that apes (aka - gorillas) were considered myths until 1861."How does this support creationism? And, uh, the pygmies knew about them.

 

[1586]

it shoots fire out of its butt

I've done this.

but i could only manipulate the fire, i couldn't be the source.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

And this argument (assuming there is some linear connection between the "premises" rolling off the printing presses here in this thread) is convincing enough people to actually lead to changes in biology teaching in schools??????? I got tired after reading one of the first ones: "We should notice at this fact that apes (aka - gorillas) were considered myths until 1861."How does this support creationism? And, uh, the pygmies knew about them.

not an argument about creationism if you ask jayrok. just an argument about the ark.This is what I was implicitely fighting against Jayrok.

 

[scorchy]

what in human myth is not even BASED on reality?

Personally, I like the myth about the rattlesnakes living in the ballpits they have for kids at Ikea.

 

[Jayrok]

And this argument (assuming there is some linear connection between the "premises" rolling off the printing presses here in this thread) is convincing enough people to actually lead to changes in biology teaching in schools??????? I got tired after reading one of the first ones: "We should notice at this fact that apes (aka - gorillas) were considered myths until 1861."How does this support creationism? And, uh, the pygmies knew about them.

not an argument about creationism if you ask jayrok. just an argument about the ark.This is what I was implicitely fighting against Jayrok.

we were just talking about the flood at that time. The jury (with me) is still out on evolution so I reserve comment.

 

[Jayrok]

what in human myth is not even BASED on reality?

Personally, I like the myth about the rattlesnakes living in the ballpits they have for kids at Ikea.

I thought that was burger king..

 

[larry_boy_44]

ok, I'm done for now... I have like 1 more page of notes or so... something like that... lol I think I have parts of other pages left, too...

 

[larry_boy_44]

no one has anything to say other than the sarcastic crap some ahve been saying the whole time?I mean, really...

 

[Jayrok]

no one has anything to say other than the sarcastic crap some ahve been saying the whole time?I mean, really...

I asked several questions that you ignored..

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

Let's assume there are 20,000 different kinds of animals that need to go in pairs on the ark... That means that we need to have 160 railroad cars worth of space on the ark.

I'm sure someone has dealt with this already, but I just got here.

All told, around 9 or 10 million species of the kingdom Animalia inhabit the earth; the exact number isn't known

Link

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

fact #3: it gets its strength from its loins.

Me too!!

You get your strength from its loins?

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

How many species of animals are there on earth?

There are about 300,000 different species of beetles. (link)If you include non-beetles such as aardvarks, the number is even higher.

I just burst out laughing at this.

 

[bigbottom]

no one has anything to say other than the sarcastic crap some ahve been saying the whole time?I mean, really...

Engaging you in a legitimate scientific debate would be like playing basketball with my four year old on a ten foot hoop and rejecting all his shots. It's just plain mean and not very sportsmanlike.Besides, I've made a number of legitimate points that you've ignored, presumably because you just want to follow your talking points.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Let's assume there are 20,000 different kinds of animals that need to go in pairs on the ark... That means that we need to have 160 railroad cars worth of space on the ark.

I'm sure someone has dealt with this already, but I just got here.

All told, around 9 or 10 million species of the kingdom Animalia inhabit the earth; the exact number isn't known

Link

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...a polar fox and a fox are the same species, etc...the real amount of species is SIGNIFICANTLY LESS than that...

 

[larry_boy_44]

no one has anything to say other than the sarcastic crap some ahve been saying the whole time?I mean, really...

Engaging you in a legitimate scientific debate would be like playing basketball with my four year old on a ten foot hoop and rejecting all his shots. It's just plain mean and not very sportsmanlike.Besides, I've made a number of legitimate points that you've ignored, presumably because you just want to follow your talking points.

you haven't said anything of any substance at any point in this thread...

 

[Mr. Pickles]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

 

[bigbottom]

no one has anything to say other than the sarcastic crap some ahve been saying the whole time?I mean, really...

Engaging you in a legitimate scientific debate would be like playing basketball with my four year old on a ten foot hoop and rejecting all his shots. It's just plain mean and not very sportsmanlike.Besides, I've made a number of legitimate points that you've ignored, presumably because you just want to follow your talking points.

you haven't said anything of any substance at any point in this thread...

Huh? I've made numerous substantive posts in this thread, including a query as to why God's will has to be proven scientifically. If you're just going to ignore my posts and state that I haven't said anything of substance, then there's really no point in continuing this dialogue.

 

[Spartans Rule]

no one has anything to say other than the sarcastic crap some ahve been saying the whole time?I mean, really...

Engaging you in a legitimate scientific debate would be like playing basketball with my four year old on a ten foot hoop and rejecting all his shots. It's just plain mean and not very sportsmanlike.Besides, I've made a number of legitimate points that you've ignored, presumably because you just want to follow your talking points.

you haven't said anything of any substance at any point in this thread...

Huh? I've made numerous substantive posts in this thread, including a query as to why God's will has to be proven scientifically. If you're just going to ignore my posts and state that I haven't said anything of substance, then there's really no point in continuing this dialogue.

Not even to entertain the rest of us?

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

Let's assume there are 20,000 different kinds of animals that need to go in pairs on the ark... That means that we need to have 160 railroad cars worth of space on the ark.

I'm sure someone has dealt with this already, but I just got here.

All told, around 9 or 10 million species of the kingdom Animalia inhabit the earth; the exact number isn't known

Link

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...a polar fox and a fox are the same species, etc...the real amount of species is SIGNIFICANTLY LESS than that...

So Moses only brought one dog and let them diversify again? Seems silly. Of course it would get even sillier if you just got two spiders and two flies... they couldn't survive in certain areas and it would take huge amounts of time... plus then there's the "how did he get all the animals..." unless it's like santa's sleigh. That might work. No time goes by.Then I could just say "you're full of ####, those are individual species" and leave it at that. 'Cause you're talking about a genus. Species means "specific." While it did mean something "more specific" (it was actually a relative term for a long period of time, as in "this is more species than that") it also means that the less real species you take, the longer the period of time has to be between Moses and now. If you're reducing 9 million actual species to 20,000 "species" (whatever you mean by that) then you're probably talking millions of years.

 

[larry_boy_44]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

 

[larry_boy_44]

no one has anything to say other than the sarcastic crap some ahve been saying the whole time?I mean, really...

Engaging you in a legitimate scientific debate would be like playing basketball with my four year old on a ten foot hoop and rejecting all his shots. It's just plain mean and not very sportsmanlike.Besides, I've made a number of legitimate points that you've ignored, presumably because you just want to follow your talking points.

you haven't said anything of any substance at any point in this thread...

Huh? I've made numerous substantive posts in this thread, including a query as to why God's will has to be proven scientifically. If you're just going to ignore my posts and state that I haven't said anything of substance, then there's really no point in continuing this dialogue.

ok, you haven't said nothing of substance, you probably said a few things, but I don't remember anything I didn't answer... (link?)

 

[Mr. Pickles]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I think you are trying to play God. Are you trying to play God, Larry?

 

[bigbottom]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two representatives of every animal group that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

A lot more than 20,000. For instance, there are 9 genuses of Dart Frogs. That I do know.Okay, 8, but one is kind of borderline, making it essentially 9.

 

[larry_boy_44]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

 

[Mr. Pickles]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

link?

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

How?

 

[bigbottom]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

Most beetle species dwell on the land and would die in the ocean.Also, it is irrelevant whether they could have survived the flood. They fall within the definition of the animals that were put on the ark. Thus, they were put on the ark.

 

[Dickies]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

This is quite an assumption....

 

[larry_boy_44]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

link?

actually I think you posted the link before that said some beetles live under water...if they live underwater they wouldn't need to be on the ark...if the beetles are all linked to eachother, then they only need the beetles who could survive in water to survive, then the rest could breed of off those and after a few generations they'd forget how to survive in water if they hadn't done it in a while...

 

[larry_boy_44]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

Most beetle species dwell on the land and would die in the ocean.Also, it is irrelevant whether they could have survived the flood. They fall within the definition of the animals that were put on the ark. Thus, they were put on the ark.

actually, I don't think insects do qualify under the definition... but that isn't the point...

 

[larry_boy_44]

also, another question...if fossilazation happens over a long period of time, how are there fossils of fish in mid-bite of another fish and things like that?

 

[Mr. Pickles]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

link?

actually I think you posted the link before that said some beetles live under water...if they live underwater they wouldn't need to be on the ark...if the beetles are all linked to eachother, then they only need the beetles who could survive in water to survive, then the rest could breed of off those and after a few generations they'd forget how to survive in water if they hadn't done it in a while...

It wasn't me, and this is incorrect.Not only that, you don't even try to substatiate your claims. Everything is "I think.."

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

link?

actually I think you posted the link before that said some beetles live under water...if they live underwater they wouldn't need to be on the ark...if the beetles are all linked to eachother, then they only need the beetles who could survive in water to survive, then the rest could breed of off those and after a few generations they'd forget how to survive in water if they hadn't done it in a while...

We're not talking about a "few" generations, here. Evolution doesn't happen on that scale in 30 years. It would take a lot longer for real diversification of species.

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

also, another question...if fossilazation happens over a long period of time, how are there fossils of fish in mid-bite of another fish and things like that?

link?

 

[bigbottom]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

link?

actually I think you posted the link before that said some beetles live under water...if they live underwater they wouldn't need to be on the ark...if the beetles are all linked to eachother, then they only need the beetles who could survive in water to survive, then the rest could breed of off those and after a few generations they'd forget how to survive in water if they hadn't done it in a while...

Again, you've ignored my assertion that most of the species of beetles can't mate with one another. If you are asserting that only a couple beetles need to have survived the oceans during the flood to propagate the 350,000 species we have today, then you've just made an argument for macroevolution/speciation.

 

[Gold Dragon]

ok, I'm done for now... I have like 1 more page of notes or so... something like that... lol I think I have parts of other pages left, too...

larry_boy_44, your posts accomplish two things.1) Ecourage Christians to doubt their faith because of how ridiculous your arguments are.

2) Encourage Atheists to continue in their atheism because of how ridiculous your arguments are.

Congratulations and pat yourself on the back.

Religious Tolerance : Beliefs about Evolution and Creation

Beliefs among conservative Christians:

In 1999-NOV, Focus on the Family, a Fundamentalist Christian agency, concluded a poll of their web site visitors concerning their beliefs about creation and evolution. Results were:

God created the universe, but I don't know when: 46%

God created the universe thousands of years ago: 43%

God created the universe billions of years ago: 10%

Life came into being and evolved on its own: 1%

I don't have a clue: 0.4%

Beliefs elsewhere in the world:

Belief in creation science seems to be largely a U.S. phenomenon. A British survey of 103 Roman Catholic priests, Anglican bishops and Protestant ministers/pastors showed that:

97% do not believe the world was created in six days.

80% do not believe in the existence of Adam and Eve.

 

[larry_boy_44]

those species aren't really species...a polar bear and a grizzly bear are the same species...

genus, not species.

alright, the Bible says "kind"... what is meant by that?genus, ok... we'll go with that...how many genus are there?

I don't think you can say that only two animals of each genus made it on the ark. I'm no science expert, but I'm fairly certain that many of the various species within a genus cannot mate with one another. If I understand your point on evolution, there must have been two of every animal that can mate. I don't think koala bears can mate with brown bears. So you'd need both of those. Hell, I don't think polar bears can mate with brown bears, but I'm not sure. I'm also fairly certain that the 350,000 species of beetles cannot mate with each other, so it's not like you can have just two beetles representing all 350,000 species.

beetles wouldn't have needed to be on the ark, they could ahve survived the flood...

link?

actually I think you posted the link before that said some beetles live under water...if they live underwater they wouldn't need to be on the ark...if the beetles are all linked to eachother, then they only need the beetles who could survive in water to survive, then the rest could breed of off those and after a few generations they'd forget how to survive in water if they hadn't done it in a while...

We're not talking about a "few" generations, here. Evolution doesn't happen on that scale in 30 years. It would take a lot longer for real diversification of species.

are you sure?You realize they pretty much "made' chihuahuas in a lab, right?that, if the animals spread out all over the world, and the worlds climates changed, that hte diversifacation would take about as long as it would take for the animals to spread out...it doesn't take millions of generations for fur color to change...besides, what is a beetles life span? If it is under 1 week, 4000 years = 200,000 generations at least... that is more than enough time for diversification to happen if they are put in all the different climates of the world...

 

[Spartans Rule]

actually, I don't think insects do qualify under the definition... but that isn't the point...

They're part of the kingdom Anamalia.If thats not the definition you're using for animals, what is?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

also, if species are so for sure right right now, why did the magazine New Scientist in September of 2004 say that the scientific community is considering reclassigying ALL species?????

Here's the article.

 

[larry_boy_44]

also, another question...if fossilazation happens over a long period of time, how are there fossils of fish in mid-bite of another fish and things like that?

link?

http://home.att.net/~creationoutreach/pictures/fish.htm