I make my living by accepting observations of the natural world -- in particular, observations about the genetic history of humans. You don't.
No, they didn't have to. Empirical observations of the natural world show that populations, including populations of humans, are constantly changing.
Make your living scamming tax dollars maybe, but certainly not accepting those natural observations. Don't try that better than tho attitude with me, get's you nowhere, with what you are preaching I'm expecting I know more than you.
Prove it - show me an Asian that has become anything but an Asian??? African???? Husky???? Mastiff???? Panda Bear???? Bottle-nose Dolphin????? ______________ (insert animal/plant/bacteria/virus name here)????????
Without the mating with another infraspecific taxa within the species - you have observed nothing but minute variations among the members of each infraspecific taxa. Despite those claimed 50, I mean 60 "errors" that occur with every birth.
Your own experiments merely validate this. After billions of mutations and billions of generations E coli remained E coli - the exact same infraspecific taxa they started as within the bacterium species to which they belong.
Why must all evolutionist's ignore what we observe in the natural world?????? And then confound the error by claiming a process whose errors barely affect the infraspecific taxa they happen in, is the cause, while ignoring those mating infraspecific taxa producing large variation right on front of your eyes.
As I said, the Fairie Dust will now begin.....
It is very simple.
show me an Asian that has become anything but an Asian??? African???? Husky???? Mastiff???? Panda Bear???? Bottle-nose Dolphin????? ______________ (insert animal/plant/bacteria/virus name here)????????
Show me one of those natural observations that you accept?????
I for one am not denying that mutations occur during those 50, I mean 60 "errors" that slipped through the repair process.
And no, we are not observing the evolution of flying cows.