You do realize that it takes more than one generation to develop a leg, right? Added: By the time that fish started developing legs, they were moving into swamps and shallows. Basically, we didn't need to be as stream lined, which allowed us to evolve much faster.

I never said that information for more genetic material can be created in one generation. The point of the matter is that no matter how much time Evolution is given, it is not enough reasoning to justify the development of extra-biology. The Darwinism mechanism has never been shown to be capable of creating new genetic information or new complex body parts such as wings, eyes, or brains. Without a mechanism that can be demonstrated to be capable of the necessary creation, the theory of evolution is just a fantasy with no real scientific basis.

Let me point out what is wrong with this A) theories are tested hypotheses, they can be proven just as evolution was with generations of creatures that reproduce quickly making more generations faster B) a fish would not develop legs to move onto land, it would develop legs from living on land, they only develop to benefit themselves in their current environment. C) they don't evolve mid lifespan, it is slight changes in DNA that changes traits, those with bad traits die off and good traits are passed on through reproduction. D)you don't fully understand evolution, which is my problem with most creationists. However you did at least get a simple understanding so I can respect that, just look further in depth and you should understand it better

Evolution is a fact only at a very small scale. It is fantasy when it is used to explain how plants and animals came into existence or how human beings supposedly evolved from apelike ancestors. We might summarize the fantasy by saying that, where the theory of evolution is true, it is not very interesting, and where it is most interesting, it is not true. If “evolution” merely refers to a process of cyclical (back and forth) variation in response to changing environmental conditions, then evolution is a fact that can be observed both in nature and in laboratory experiments. For example, when a population of insects is sprayed with a deadly chemical like DDT, the most susceptible insects die but the individuals most resistant to the poison survive to breed and leave offspring, which inherit the genes that provide resistance. After many generations of insects have been sprayed, the entire surviving population may be comprised of the DDT-resistant variety, and some new form of insect control will have to be applied. Such changes are not permanent, however, because the resistant mosquitoes are more fit than the others only for as long as the insecticide is applied. When the environment becomes free of the toxic chemical, the insect population tends to revert to what it was before. A similar effect explains how disease-causing bacteria become resistant to antibiotic drugs like penicillin, which then are no longer as effective in controlling the disease as they formerly were. Almost all illustrations of “evolution in action” in textbooks or museum exhibits are similar to these examples. They involve no increase in complexity or appearance of new body parts or even permanent change of any kind. Small-scale, reversible population variations of this sort are usually called microevolution, although “adaptive variation” would be a better term. It is misleading to describe adaptive variation as “evolution,” because the latter term commonly refers also to macroevolution. Macroevolution is the grand story of how life supposedly evolved by purely natural processes from very simple beginnings to become complex, multicelled plants and animals, and eventually human beings, without God’s participation being needed at any step along the way. Charles Darwin assumed that macroevolution was merely microevolution extended over very long periods of time. Biology textbooks, museums, and television programs still teach people to make the same assumption, so that examples of microevolution are used as proof that complex animals and even human beings evolved from simpler organisms by a similar process. The primary flaw in the story of macroevolution is that all plants and animals are packed with information—the complicated instructions that coordinate the many processes enabling the body and brain to function. Even Richard Dawkins, the most famous living advocate of Darwin’s theory, admits that every cell in a human body contains more information than all the volumes of an encyclopedia, and every one of us has trillions of cells in his or her body, which have to work together in marvelous harmony. The greatest weakness of the theory of evolution is that science has not discovered a process that can create all the necessary information, which can be likened to the software that directs a computer. Without such a demonstrated creative process, evolution is merely a story, because [b]its supposed mechanism can neither be duplicated in a laboratory nor observed in nature.[/b] It is true that there are patterns of similarity among living creatures. For example, humans, apes, mice, worms, and even plants have many similar genes. The important question is not whether there are similarities among all living things but whether those similarities came about through a natural process akin to the observable examples of adaptive variation that we find in textbooks and museum exhibits. One mistake Christians often make in debating evolution is to take on too many issues at once, rather than starting with the most important problem and solving it first. For example, evolution requires a time scale of many millions of years, while many people understand the Bible to allow for an earth history of only a few thousand years. The evolutionary time scale is debatable, but debating it involves several complex scientific disciplines and distracts attention from the most important defect of the theory of evolution. The only mechanism the evolutionists have is a combination of random variation and natural selection, illustrated by the survival of the insects that happened to be resistant to an insecticide. [b]This Darwinism mechanism has never been shown to be capable of creating new genetic information[/b] or new complex body parts such as wings, eyes, or brains. Without a mechanism that can be demonstrated to be capable of the necessary creation, the theory of evolution is just a fantasy with no real scientific basis. The Bible teaches, “In the beginning God created” and “In the beginning was the Word.” A simple way of explaining this basic principle is to say that a divine intelligence existed before anything else and that intelligence was responsible for the origin of life and for the existence of all living things, including human beings. [b]No matter how much time we might allow for evolution to do the necessary creating, the evidence shows that the process would never get started[/b] because all evolution can do is to further minor variations in organisms that are already living, without any change in their basic classification. When the Bible says, “In the beginning God created” (Gen 1:1), it is presenting us with a fact, which we need to know to understand everything else, including what we were created for and how God wants us to live. The Bible also says that God created men and women in His own image. That, too, is a fact. If it were not true, there would be no science, because [b]no theory of evolution can demonstrate how intelligence came into existence[/b], including the intelligence of misguided people who misuse science to try to explain creation without allowing any role to God. “In the beginning was the Word.” The Bible says it and, properly understood, the evidence of science confirms it. Anyone who says otherwise is peddling fantasy, not fact.

I can't even begin on how wrong this is... The theory of evolution does not even try to explain creation.. All evolution does is explain how species adapt and change to be better fit for their environments. Both micro and macro are factual, they are the same exact process just elongated to millions of years. The bible is not a form of evidence, how can you believe that a few early Christians 2000 years ago knew more about the age of the earth than modern day scientists. Are you ignoring the rock layers and fossils found all over the world?

(1) And? The rock layers do exhibit a thing that can be observed: Being a rock. And the fossils? I never doubted that those creatures existed for the Bible even describes animals that are bizarre. Neither the fossils nor the rock formations show that Darwinism mechanism has ever been able to create new genetic information or new complex body parts such as wings, eyes, or brains. Without a mechanism that can be demonstrated to be capable of the necessary creation, the theory of evolution is just a fantasy with no real scientific basis. Think about it: Why would, in the Evolutionary sense of life, the development of a cell containing the DNA of that organism possess the needed amount of genetic code necessary to develop the progression of an organism's natural physical features? It's too complex, even if it took millions to billions of years for a human to develop. (2) ...and that's the other thing: why would in this Evolutionary process would develop the need to encourage an animal, humans, to develop intelligence. Answer: Intelligence manifests intelligence. The Bible states that man was made in the image of God, saying we were likened as unto God; therefore, we are intelligent. We are capable of almost anything, yet biologically or physically, we are useless and ineffective in nature naked. (3) Another thing: Why do we work? Why do we wear clothes? Why should we be moral? Why is there capital punishment? Why do we encourage women's rights? All these questions and more can be answered in Genesis. When one says, "It's by Evolution," he explains that this process can bring simple beginnings to complex data within every organism. How complicated it is: If I were to get every part of a hand watch, and put it in a bag, how many years would it take for it to assemble if I left in place, or better yet, if I shook the bag? Even if I had all the time in the world, nothing so complicated can manifest from simpler beginnings.

Every animal has some sort of social structure, whether that be wolves in packs or individual animals fending for themselves, they all act differently around their own species and humans are the same way, we just evolved to be the most intelligent, this is millions of years of evolution at work.

Rock layers are used to tell periods of time... Scientists are able to predict time periods down to the year that fossils were buried

Research how much dust Evolutionist concluded to be on the moon in 1969.

Continuing on LOL going back to skim through the article again. There was a piece in there about genetic info, you would be correct in saying there is no increase in genetic info, the info is slightly changed in offspring and if enough info is changed then it becomes a new species.(millions of years are required to get a new species) Just gonna skim through one last time LOL

You're once again misunderstanding how evolution works. A fish doesn't just grow a leg. There's a whole phase of in between where it slowly evolves to be able to navigate and survive land better and better until it no longer needs the water. It doesn't go from the water to living on land and having legs in one generation. Evolution doesn't claim that. Only people who don't believe evolution claim evolution claims that. Also please read my thread on facts, laws, and theories.

Look at the above reply.

Darwinism mechanism? Are you high?

Would you have it rather say the Darwinistic mechanism?