Besides, new species *have* arisen in historical times:
- A new species of mosquito, isolated in London's Underground, has speciated from Culex pipiens (Byrne and Nichols 1999; Nuttall 1998).
- Several new species of plants have arisen via polyploidy (when the chromosome count multiplies by two or more) (de Wet 1971). One example is Primula kewensis (Newton and Pellew 1929).
- Rhagoletis pomonella, the apple maggot fly, is undergoing sympatric speciation. Its native host in North America is Hawthorn (Crataegus spp.), but in the mid-1800s, a new population formed on introduced domestic apples (Malus pumila). The two races are kept partially isolated by natural selection (Filchak et al. 2000).
- The mosquito Anopheles gambiae shows incipient speciation between its populations in northwestern and southeastern Africa (Fanello et al. 2003; Lehmann et al. 2003).
- Silverside fish show incipient speciation between marine and estuarine populations (Beheregaray and Sunnucks 2001).
- In several Canadian lakes, which originated in the last 10,000 years following the last ice age, stickleback fish have diversified into separate species for shallow and deep water (Schilthuizen 2001, 146-151).
- Cichlids in Lake Malawi and Lake Victoria have diversified into hundreds of species. Parts of Lake Malawi which originated in the nineteenth century have species indigenous to those parts (Schilthuizen 2001, 166-176).
- A Mimulus species adapted for soils high in copper exists only on the tailings of a copper mine that did not exist before 1859 (Macnair 1989).
And these are just a few examples.
This is completely irrelevant. While I hate the terms because of the groups using them and how they do so, micro-Ev does NOT make macro Ev a fact, as taught. And actual working scientists know this. So to pretend I "knocked over a strawman" as you put it, while you do have a valid point
you're making, it is a strawman of your own since it doesn't respond to what I said in any way. Which was (and is) that G-d is not at odds w/ modern biology in any way.
You also mentioned being able to teach me, and as far as current micro Ev finds I'm sure you are more up to date than I am; but I've discussed the big picture with someone involved w/ mapping the human genome, as well as w/ a Prof / PhD in micro-biology who started his studies as a devout atheist, and turned to the Lord solely because of what he discovered. While the genome mapper is a more productive person, he does so by regurgitating what he's taught and has nothing I could respect as critical thinking, while the Prof has critical thinking that rivals anyone I've ever met. Of course he also has quite a few years and wisdom to go along with it, so it's not a fair contest but still:
Ev as taught (at least here) does not account for the world we live in. And the more we discover, the more we move away from the slow gradualistic change predicted by the Ev model, and the more we move towards cataclysmic change; i.e., G-d's creative power. Just look at the Cambrian explosion! But of course, you can't see how that fits perfectly into Genesis 1:1, so you criticize based on reading into the Bible what you don't believe anyway, which is not a sound starting point for a comparison!
All this really does get jumbled into the discussion of if atheism is a "system" or even a faith. (Assuming atheists are not content to ignore the ramifications of our existence, that is) For example, I asserted atheists embrace materialism / naturalism. The 2 that objected to that actually
do, and reject any Spiritual realm or supernatural occurrence. To me, this seems self-evident. (Although I'll allow that Shintoism may be an exception)
