[vessel]

>It's been seen to happen, and within a span of decades. New species emerge. Game over.

By assexual or self-fertilizing reproductive methods in plants and maybe in flies. Often times, Colchicine induced mutations.

Cite one vertebrate, get a point.

Your turn.

Your failure supports creation science.

[orionblamblam]

>Cite one vertebrate, get a point.
>Your failure supports creation science.

Wow. That's about the least logical line of reasoning I've seen today, and that's saying a lot... I dealt with both management AND Union.

Nobody excpet you has implied speciation of larger, slower breeding vertebrate critters within a span of decades. Your use of strawman arguements points to either a serious deficiency in your case, a lack of basic knowledge of the subject, or a lack of ethics.

And besides... lets say that evolution was suddenly proven false. How does that support creation science? perhaps it supports the theory that we are all the dream of Brahma? Perhaps it supports the notion that the universe was sneezed out the nose of the Great Green Arkleseizure? Perhaps it supports the hypothesis that we're living in The Matrix? A failure of one theory does not support a competing theory. The only thing that supports a theory is evidence. And the evidence supports evolution... but there is a complete dearth of evidence to support creation "science."

But... as for vertebrates... one that is clearly seen to have evolved: Homo Sapiens. You will note that geological strata more than a few hundred thousand years old show no modern humans. But they show species that are clearly realted. And older strata show yet different species that are clearly related to those intermediary species. And the trends in evolution are obvious. Evolution is supported, end of game, thanks for playing.