"Adaptations" are a far cry from one type of creature becoming a totally different creature. But any ability to adapt STILL has to be in their genetic makeup in the first place. And those adaptations can only go as far as their DNA allows.

There are questions that evolution can not answer. How about.....when a fish was evolving into an air breathing, land walking creature, which would supposedly take at LEAST "thousands of years", what did the creature do when it's gills had "evolved" so far to lungs, that they didn't work as gills anymore, and the lungs hadn't yet evolved far enough to breathe air?

Or reptiles that supposedly evolved into birds......what did they do when their front legs evolved into partial wings, but were not "evolved" enough to fly, but too far to walk?
Did these fish and reptiles just lie around and wait for evolution to finish the job? Think of just how much sense that makes.

Some say it's pretty obvious evolution happened, but then you have to ignore questions like this completely. Otherwise you will start to question what you have been taught.....just as I did many years ago. Thats why I believe God made everything as He said He did. Makes alot more sense to me at least.

---

Another thing......isn't evolution supposed to be a positive thing? Arn't things supposed to evolve into higher life forms? Isn't that the whole evolution story?
Then let me also ask you, if a fish was evolving into an air breathing creature, why did it give up it's ability to also breathe under water? Wouldn't it be beneficial to be able to do BOTH?
And why wouldn't the reptiles that became birds just keep their front legs AND grow wings? Wouldn't that ALSO be one heck of a benefit?
If MAN came from an ape like creature with a tail, why did we lose the tail? Wouldn't it be beneficial to have a tail that we could use to grab things?

Another point.....if evolution happened, wouldn't male AND female have to evlove at EXACTLY the same rate in order for a creature to procreate? Heck, a few hundred years of evolution difference would have killed everything off, wouldn't it?

Why are there still monkeys? Why didn't they ALL evolve into higher life forms, as man supposedly did?

Why are there still lobed finned fishes today ,(The coelacanth that i keep bringing up that as was shown in the posted video by Wils) when they are used as "proof" of their lobbed fins "evolving" into legs?
Even though i have posted about that fish, here it is STILL being used as evolution proof. And no explanation of any of this has been posted. It seems every time i post something that flys in the face of evolution, it kinds of gets ignored.
I know why. It's because there arn't any answers.
Of course I can't prove God exists. I'm just trying to show that evolution also has no proof. If you are going to believe things based on faith, to me it makes more sense to put that faith in God then in man.

---

Have a look at this and tell me what you think Cheesey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution 

---

If we all came from Adam and Eve how do you explain different races?

People from areas of the world all have different types of bodies, skin, that help and protect them...Isnt that a form of evolution?

Creationist believe in microevolution and macroevolution. Creationist don't believe in macroevolution. Ex: Different dog species come from microevolution.

Biologist believe in just evolution.

---

Ninja summed it up nicely.
No matter what small change there is in humans, they still are 100% humans. No matter the skin color, height, hair color, eye color. They are still 100% human.
If you were to compare me to my family, you could see different shades in just my family.
My parents bith had black hair, brown eyes. My brother, you'd never think we were brothers. Dark complexion, black hair, brown eyes. Me, blue eyes, blonde hair, light complexion. And thats just in one generation.

Adaptations that are already in the genes can show up. And dominant genes often over rule. That doesn't mean we all came from a rock "millions of years ago," does it?

---

got ya

I haven't read all the posts on both sides of this evolution debate that has popped up but I want to throw in my two cents:

Creationism and evolution do NOT answer the same question and as such do not conflict with one another. They are completely independent. Arguing against creationism (or any other religious doctrine or belief for that matter) using science is pointless. Likewise, trying to prove a scientific theory false through religious doctrine is a waste of time.

Creationism answers who is responsible for life as we know it, evolution answers how. The way to reconcile the two, or at least to correct the rather poor assumption that they must conflict, is to say the "who" in creationism used the "how" of evolution to create life as we know it now. What if God created the mechanism of evolution?

Well then you might run into conflicts about time frames and specific creation stories when compared to the time frame we have for evolution. I went to a Catholic high school and naturally that meant we had religion class. In Freshman year, my religion teacher quoted a rabbi he knew in response to this very subject. The line went, "how great is God that he can make a world 6,000 years old and put rocks on it that are millions of years old." After all, if you believe in an omnipotent God, why should he/she be constrained to our concept of time.

Anyway, make what you want of what I've said. I'm not going to get into the actual meat of the debate but I do hope that people form their ideas on the science in question independently of what their religious beliefs are. Also, props on keeping the debate civil thus far.

---

The problem i have with evolution is: MOST (not all, most) people that believe in evolution don't believe in God. Plus, saying evolution happened is saying that God lied in the Bible. I myself don't have the nerve to call God a liar.
I have gone against evolution using it's own "proof". Go ahead and teach evolution if you want, but throw out all the lies, and use ONLY what you KNOW is true and can prove. Or label the stuff they make up for what it is, a man's theory, NOT FACT.
Lobed finned fishes, as you saw in Wils video if you watched it, they are STILL using that as "proof" even though the fish is still alive, exactly as it was in the "fossil record". Little bones in whales called vestigail, when they are in fact NOT that? Using 40% of ONE skeleton to build an entire race of creatures, 60% of which they made up in the first place? Thats not science at all. Yet these are the major "proof" they sell to the children they are endoctrinating into their "religion". And of course kids take what they are taught by teachers as honest and true. Thats why we have so many people today not believing in God. Even if they are taught to believe in God at home, they get to school and get 8 or 9 hours of some teachers telling them pretty much that their parents are lieing to them.
Then we wonder why no one values human life anymore. If we are all just animals that happened by some goofy chance, we have no more value then any other animal that "evolved", right? So there are no absolutes. If you want to do something bad, why not do it? It's not like there's a GOD to answer to in the end, right? So if you can get away with the crime down here, you are home free!

---

Thats MICROEVOLUTION, which does happen.
Thats a HUGE leap to say a moth will turn into a bird or a reptile, or some other completely different creature then it is, right?

---