No. It's adaptation. Evolutionists are not able to prove it (evolution) occurs so they've redefined what does occur to mean something entirely different. Adaptation is not evolution. The fruit fly experiments produced 3,000 fruit fly variants. Not one evolved into anything different.
I don't think you understand what evolution is. A change in the gene allele frequency of a population is evolution, not adaptation. Small changes add up to big changes over time. For creationism to be true creationists should be able to find a cut off point in that sort of change. To date they have not found such a limit.
Speciation is a construct of evolutionists. If speciation did take place, why has it stopped? And why can it not be demonstrated in the lab?
I disagree entirely. People who breed new varieties of existing plants know that there is a limit to the number of variants that can be bred.
I get accused of making sweeping statements without out support. Apparently that is acceptable from my critics.
What makes you think that it stopped? And it has been demonstrated in the lab.
Of course there is. Evolution depends on each generation of a population producing a range of variants for selection. Forced selection depletes the information content of the gene pool faster than it can be replenished by natural means so that variation ceases and no further change can occur. The same thing can happen in nature if the environment, i.e. the selection criteria change too rapidly, frequently resulting in extinction.
You could always politely ask for evidence, though once you refuse evidence after it has been given you do lose the right to demand any further evidence.
Here's one that does - which also has an article about why creationists insist on linking them:
darwiniana.org said:
The period of abiogenesis is here represented by the words "First Life ?" It is not part of evolution.
darwiniana.org - a project of the International Wildlife Museum
