Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
I wasn't aware that evolutionary biology has been observed beyond random changes which occur naturally within every species. Nothing new has evolved since Darwin introduced his theory. Science has only observed changes within a species.
|
It has though. New species have been observed. And even if they hadn't, direct "I saw it" evidence isn't required to substantiate evolution. In fact if a dog gave birth to something other than a dog, that would support creationism. There is genetic evidence, homology between different organisms (two organisms that share a structure that can be traced back to a common ancestor), the fossil record, biogeography, etc etc.. Evolution makes specific predictions that have shown to be true.
The only prediction that I can think of that creationism makes is that there would be some sort of mechanism to stop "microevolution" (the changes within a species you agree have been observed) from becoming "macroevolution" (changes to a new species, which has also been observed). However no mechanism has been found yet. There's nothing to stop changes from crossing "species boundaries" (whatever those are).
If creationists wanted to really disprove evolution, that's where they could focus their efforts. Find that mechanism and they'd have the attention of everyone.