Magic is Terrorism.

[IFireflyl]

generic-user-1 said:

IFireflyl said:

Lololololol! If you don't think that polar bears and grizzly bears are the same species then you don't believe in science anyway. Lmfao.

Same for not believing in macroevolution. Here you go:

Berkeley Evolution

Berkeley Macroevolution

You've already proven that you don't know any more about evolution than they teach in high school.

you used macroevolution like a creationist and you link somthing that says completly different things. again, there is no such thing as macro or micro evolution, its all the same mechanism, so if you prove "micro" evolution you automaticly prove "macro" evolution. uc berkley isnt doing a great ob if they use those 2 words because they make it very easy to say uhh that isnt proved(like you tried). the only difference between macro and micro evolution is the scale of observing, not inter and intraspecies evolution. grizzly bears are ursus arctos and polar bears ursus maritimus, but there are hybrids between those two, so one school of biologie wants to count them as one species(because they have fertile offspring in the wild) and another as two(because they look and behave different).

You don't know what you're talking about. I linked the same article twice, but the second link is further into the article. I thought you'd have been able to figure that out. You don't like Berkeley? Here:

Nature.com

Nhm.ac.uk

Wikipedia.com

Bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca

Discovery.org

Anthro.palomar.edu

Micro-evolution does not, and scientifically cannot, prove macro-evolution.