Gary

Because it has everything to do with my point. There were huge changes in species (say from a lizard to a bird) from the beginning of the era to the end, changes that fly in the face of Macro-evolution. That's the concept of Quantam, Macro, evolution. Really you can call it what you want, but my point is that the Triassic period holds BIG problems secular scientists and micro-evolution.

I'm gone for tonight fellas. Got an early day ahead of me.

Have you done any research on the "Triassic" period? It is exactly what I'm refering to. And I know the argument that there were no giant leaps, however, by making that statement you have to eliminate the Triassic period from the equation. The belief of adaptive speciation (refering in this case to your point above) is not held by all secular scientist, in fact many argue Quantum evolution. Your taking me out of context H2B. I never argued that evolution was impossible, it's not only possible, but is a fact. Of course your evolution and mine are two different things.

From Websters....Speciation; the formation of new and distinct species in the course of evolution. In individual cases, it involves the splitting of a single evolutionary lineage into two or more genetically independent ones. You are talking about a completely different evolution here. I'm talking about giant leaps in speciation (Macro-Evolution). We certainly know, and has been proven, that much smaller leaps like you've mentioned are true.

I gave an example about an hour ago, and it goes right along with my point about speciation. It's a simple one yet it's very difficult to argue from a Macro-evolutionary standpoint... Question: Where is the fossil record of giant leaps between species?

Regular Scientist? How about we say "mainstream" scientist. The reason I say that is that I'm kind of a creationism vs evolution nut, and I read a lot of journals about the subject, and you might be suprised at the number of scientist that have moved toward creationism over the last 15 years. I'm not saying their moving to Christianity, but the science of creationism. As far as speciation is concerned... I'm not sure what your talking about. The speciation I've been talking about is the process of formation of a new species from an existing one, and that has not been proven, in fact there's almost zero evidence of it, and that's being generous.

Incorrect... Creationist scientist seperated what is known as "Micro" (a term that evolutionary scientist coined in the 20's) into two terms "Macro" & "Micro" in order to help laymen understand two very different processes. Macro represents huge jumps in "Speciation", while Micro is (which is proven by the way) represents a completely different subject. No it doesn't... While it can spur good strong debate, there is a plethora of evidence to the contrary. Like I mentioned to Niche, I believe he was saying that something had to make the something that made the something, otherwise where did it come from. I certainly don't think that his theory disproves evolution, but I agree with his point. It's simple, but makes sense.

I think his point was, where did the "single-celled organism" intially come from?

First of all, I would suggest doing some unbiased research on the subject of Macro-evolution (I'm assuming your familiar with the term). Secondly, it's impossible to discuss all of the details here because of the subjects depth. However, one significant example would be the almost complete lack of a fossil record reflecting evolution between species. Edit: I also agree with lockmat below that the concept of evolution as determined by Darwin (we were created by the primordial ooze) is impossible.

Your kidding right? Science has NOT proven Macro-evolution, in fact as we go, we're finding more to disprove it's theory.

One of the ways the Bible proves itself to be inspired by God is prophecy in both testaments. I really don't want to get involved in the debate, but when studied, Biblicle prophecy can be astounding. Another point that scholars will use is the sheer amount of manuscript evidence of the New Testament. The Greek manuscripts alone are over 5000 in number, with Homer coming in 2nd with just a few hundred.

Happy B-Day bro...

This isn't in Sugarland, it's in West Houston, on the Beltway 8 between I-10 & 290 (1 block north of Clay).

LOL! I had my new (outdoor) kitty bring one to my front door the other day. Good Kitty...

Are you sure that's not a common lizard that was addapting it's color to the chair? I thought the green lizards were camelians.

Oh yeah, I've seen them feast on them several times. I used to kill them (water snakes) not knowing what they were until I encountered one that was gourging himself with a very large rat. I've actually seen them go after small turtles to. I've also started putting cat food outside my back door to get the neighborhood cats to hang out at night, and it has worked like a charm. My rat and mouse population has dwindled down to almost nothing.

DON"T KILL IT! My house backs up to a bayou, and I have those watersnakes all the time, and what makes them great is they eat rats and mice. I've had a few cotton mouths and their easy to identify. their heads are more triangular (viper), and their generally a black/dark brown. Those I kill.

What are you talking about? 128 kbps? Everything at the Toyota Center is run digitally at a 96 khz sample rate, which is as good as it get's, and again, the acoustics are almost identicle to any hall of the same size, anywhere. Are you the only person that's "older" that cares for good acoustics? I'm not so sure you know what your talking about here, especially in regards to the acoustics of a venue the size being discussed. I challenge you to give 1 example of a major hall that has great acoustics. Just 1. Now your backtracking... You intially wanted a hall that had MAJOR acts, and a 7,000 seat arena won't cut it.

Ok then, Sounds like a "weiner"...