Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
Ok that's fine AC,
but showing CHANGE is the only evidence for evolution, not the opposite.

Darwinist have known since they 1st asserted evolution that there are many things like Horseshoe Crabs, insects and many other creatures that have not changed from the beginning of their appearance in the fossil record 250-800 "million" years ago.
At that time they had to accommodate that fact into their "theory", so to claim it now as evidence for evolution is BS.

And finding living bacteria the same as 2 "billion" years old versions shows the robustness of DNA and genetic stasis. the fact that genes don't mutate even with long stretches of time is a blow against the concept of pliability of genes in general.

Back then people were not as gullible as millions now are. So they did not claim back then that which looked to disprove Evolution as a factor in it being a valid theory.

What they have never explained is how species that were sent towards change by any catalyst thus had millions of years to effect that great change! For in their theory it was about survival and why change if it is so minor that millions(or even hundreds of thousands) of years the species can survive without that change!??

No sir, the logic and reality denies so much of their premise. Faith in the magic of "eons of time" SERVES THAT PURPOSE.- --Tyr