@CHYUII: I remember the ED thread.
To tell you the truth, i did and do skip the longer ramblings in this thread. As i've been participating that kind of discussion for years now and am pretty familiar with the presented argumentation already.
Basically all that you see is copypasting CreationWiki.
Critisizing evolution theory isn't a problem, in science it's done all the time. The problem is, what is offered instead.
Let's imagine for a moment that evolution would be proven false. What would it mean to creationism? Nothing. There wouldn't still be any proof of god or any other supernatural lifeforms.
Microevotion and macroevolution are the same thing. Macroevolution refers to species evolving to another species. Macroevolution as a term brings problems, since it's hard to determine the point where a specie is considered being evolved to another specie.
Nobody is saying you can't believe in what you believe, but they are tired to argumentation that is based on circular reasoning or even liars paradox.
Ei Kiinasti.
Eikä Japanisti.
Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.
Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.
