EVOLUTION PART: Hello. Evolution as we understand it these days is evolution by genes mutating. That is to say, macro-evolution. I think this is unscientific as l have not yet seen it demonstrated in the lab. Before you say it's a slow process, please: there are about 8.7 million species on earth. Some of these species exist in ginormous quantity, and also breed very rapidly. Plus we can breed fruit flies and bacteria in the lab quite fast. In all that, where is the evidence for evolution by genetic mutation? Some websites purporting to give examples will bait and switch and offer up something else. They will even say, evolution by genetic mutation happened because blue eyes, brown eyes. No, these traits existed from the start. Also, where is the laboratory evidence for these traits emerging in nature via mutations? They will even, no irony, say it must have happened because how else we get these traits? This is unscientific. Also why can't it be that there are no dragons because they were exiled to Pern after the 4th Dragon War? Why is the evolutionist's backstory deemed cooler than dragons? I've even read that cats flatten ears and hiss in order to look like snakes. How would a cat know what itself looked like when hissing? How would that trait be inherited? Evolution by genetic mutation is like saying you can download a corrupted software file, and it will still run. In fact, if you have enough instances of corrupted files, they will somehow be inherited to the server, and furthermore, you'll get NEW APPS developing within the download! I'd love for an actual bioscience student to answer. The science non-literate will always fanatically - and dramatically - defend evolution by gene mutation and get angry when challenged. Please, calmly give me the evidence. Show me the money. NATURAL SELECTION PART: I don't have an issue with Natural Selection, which l guess we would call micro-evolution. Natural selection is scientific, it is demonstrable in the lab. I've seen a few sites purporting to list examples of evolution but do a bait and switch and offer up *drum roll* ... natural selection. Antibiotic resistance is natural selection. Natural selection = nothing new under the sun. A species of bird might gradually gain a higher frequency of longer necks. But they are still the green necks of the green kiki bird of some Ecuadorian island. Nothing new under the sun. No new genetic information created. LOGICAL FALLACIES: Please don't sophistry. Please consult the Wikipedia list of logical fallacies here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies It's not that l'm being arrogant in demanding eloquence. It's just intellectual honesty. ANGER: I have no hatred to you in this message and in fact l don't know you and it's not about your or me. So please, don't show anger. RUSH MIGHT WORK? Please don't rush me with responses hoping that some eventually go unanswered and therefore victory woo woo. Just, wait for replies and if l say l'm done and explain why we've reached an impasse, l hope you follow suit and explain why you think there's an impasse too. MODERATOR GOTTA MEAN SOMETHING: I respect all moderators. Thank you. But l'll take an argument as l find it, regardless who puts it forward.