I am not a creationist, but this is what i understand from many Creationists.
Dog breeding has been brought up many times, and the bottom line seems to be that no matter what genetic differences there may be, dogs are still
dogs, thus Creationists can accept their mutations.
Creationists argument seems to be that they feel evolution is stating that a fish evolved into a dog (very generalized example); meaning cross species
differences. This, they refuse to accept.
Why? I only have my opinion, and that being that Creationists deliberately refuse to acknowledge that no where in evolution does it prove that species
to different species occurred within a couple of generations.
Creationists ask for proof of "middle" species, and when faced with fossils of dinosaurs with feathers, or whales with legs- they cry hoax, and
begin their arguments again.
Bottom line for ME:
For Creationists to publicly accept Evolution means their foundation has cracks. Why would they want to examine those cracks?
[edit on 11-1-2010 by cjcord]

