The End Is Near

@DocSavage [quote]The Bible is not a factual text. No one cares.[/quote]

That's one way of looking at it. Oddly enough not everyone agrees. In fact, you may be surprised to hear that evolution is a crock of eugenic shit, and that many, many, non-militant unbelievers think that it is at least as nonsensical as the Bible and it's proponents are substantially more pathologically narrow mined and dogmatic than religious fanatics in the dark ages.

@AkioTsukino
As you pointed out. It’s been observed in the lab. So we know that evolution works. Can’t say that about creation.

@DocSavage [quote]As you pointed out. It’s been observed in the lab.[/quote]

Show me. Certainly they must have recorded this in some fashion. Show me.

[quote]So we know that evolution works.[/quote]

Oh, we do? Define we, know, evolution and works as you mean to implement them, please? [There's a question to an unbeliever, folks, watch for it.]

[quote]Can’t say that about creation.[/quote]

Of course we can. The same as you can say it about evolution. Knowing it, thinking it, believing it and saying it is one thing. Well, several examples of one thing individually . . . you get the picture . . . but showing is another thing all together. So once again. Get the picture. Show me.

@AkioTsukino
[media=https://youtu.be/PjcFSy1KCTI]

Here’s a quick, look at observable evolution. Which you say you don’t believe in. I don’t expect you to accept or admit it as evidence. But it meets the burden of proof on my part.
Let’s see you produce something observable, spontaneous creation of a animal species. I trust you can ask Jehovah to spare you a couple minutes.

“We” refers to the general population of people that actually read up on these things. “You” refers to people who refuse to provide and reject evidence that is contrary to their opinions.
Good enough ?

@DocSavage [quote]Here’s a quick, look at observable evolution. Which you say you don’t believe in.[/quote]

I don't believe in observable evolution? I couldn't even get you to define evolution, except for @newjaninev2 ranting about azaleas or something. Was it you or someone else that said evolution took too long to produce in video evidence? From the start I defined clearly the difference between the Biblical kind and biological term species. I've repeatedly stated that I want the basics. To start by discussing that difference. It has yet to happen. And that's why I'm not interested in this debate. It can't go on for my part until we get past that.

So what is a species and what is a sub species and how do they compare to the Biblical kind? How does the yellow blotched ensatina differ in this regard from the monterey ensatina?

How is it established that the migration and subsequent natural selection took place and why didn't it include other species within the same geological area?

@AkioTsukino
You wanted the basics, you got them. In evolution, there are no “kinds”
It’s does not have one animal, simply turning into a different animal. The changes occurred over time. Small changes , gradually separating it from it’s parent species. There are numerous conditions and variations that cause the changes, and determine which ones are passed on.
The process doesn’t conform to your biblical comparison. It adapts to the environment and conditions for survival. It’s not guided by an intelligent designer.
So where is your photographic evidence of creation. I kept my end of the deal. It’s not my problem you don’t know what you’re talking about. Put up or shut up.

@DocSavage [quote]In evolution, there are no “kinds”[/quote]

Explain why you think there aren't any.

[quote]It’s does not have one animal, simply turning into a different animal.[/quote]

Which is why from the start I questioned if there was even a debate and asked if there were what it might be. No answer. Just long winded conjectural scenarios and descriptions of things not evolving into other things.

[quote] The changes occurred over time. Small changes , gradually separating it from it’s parent species.[/quote]

Name other examples besides the ones in the video. Mule?

[quote]The process doesn’t conform to your biblical comparison.[/quote]

I wouldn't be so foolish to suggest that because its interpretation appears to be nonsense. And you haven't established anything at all that I can see.

@AkioTsukino
[quote] Explain why you think there aren't any. [/quote]

There are species. There are subspecies. If you believe there are “kinds” like dog kind, or cat kind, or bird kind. And Noah only needed two of each.
The only way you can have so many variations today is by evolution. Which you say doesn’t happen. Each “kind” could only produce it own .

@AkioTsukino
[quote] Name other examples besides the ones in the video. [/quote]
One of these is a picture of a duck, which one ?