(1) Big read. That took a lot of my time. (2) It still didn't disprove what I stated previously. The straw man is still plausible since naturally, nature hasn't developed no species, even through speciation. Only variants have manifested. I must frequently remind detractors of Christianity that I do not deny that species vary, change, and are even discovered over time. The biodiversity represented in the 8.7 million species present in the world is a testament to the fact, but [b]it isn't by the random processes of chance that they develop but to the genetic variability and potential for diversification within the already present kinds[/b] (when not taking into account the effect of environmental hazards affecting the organism's biology). Continuing the argument as to how I feel concerning speciation may actually feel in vain due to the fact that my encounters with atheistic "scientists" have taught me that they may enthusiastically or stubbornly cling to anything as long as "God" isn't the "reasonable" conclusion (even though logically, he fulfills all paradoxes, even to the question as to why anything should exist or possess a cause). For example: On April 20, 2010, it was reported that there was a group of scientists who took to studying the Anolis roquet, a lizard residing on the island of Martinique (http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2010/04/island-reptiles-buck-evolutionary-trend). Unfortunately for our Darwin lobbyists, the study revealed opposing data against the the "scientist's" mainstream hypothesis. Originally in their thinking, they assumed that one of the best ways to split a species naturally is through allopatric speciation, which is when some sort of physical barrier separates a group of organisms from the same species' population, causing them to eventually become so genetically distinct that they can no longer interbreed. However, the lizards in the study showed no apparent speciation or evidence of this science in the last acclaimed eight million years of their assumed existence. According to the team, who were led by Bangor University evolutionary biologist Roger Thorpe, stated that the results "...really surprised..." him, and that they had expected greater genetic divergence because of the isolation, but the reptiles, unfortunately, showed that the lizards diverged too little to become separate species. Despite the evidence that was literally unquestionable and present, they reported that the lizards may be in the process of speciation today without no basis to conclude the statement except the thinking "Hmm, there's no evidence of speciation...so the lizards must be in the process of forming evidence for speciation," even though the study completely exhibited that the different lizard populations that were split into different habitats on the island only resulted with the minuet or no chance of their kind interbreeding (even when beforehand, his team concluded that the island was in assumed isolation for eight million years). This sort of attitude amazed me. Even out of the evidence that was reported, the bias reasoning resonated completely through their logic.