Microscopes and telescopes

[Trantorfuzz]

Although fossilization is a rare event, which would account for the absence of the motion picture morphing that creationists seem to expect, the fossil record has revealed that macro-evolution has taken place.

However, it's a mistake to imagine that the fossil record is even the primary evidence of macroevolution. The primary evidence is the overwhelming number of systematic anatomic and physiological resemblances among the organisms of today. It amazes me that anyone possessed of a gram of common sense, who can explain the physical resemblance between family members, would refuse to grasp the implications of the kind of evidence that Darwin documented.

Darwin knew very little about the fossil record--and nothing about genetics--when he formulated his theory. The fact that the fossil record and genetics have conformed to his theory of natural selection is simply further proof of the validity of the descendents of his theory.

 

[ScottySatan]

Except for the genetic code would look different, and that has been confirmed. The difference in the expression of genes can be documented now using DNA sequencers. It's gone to the point where synonymous codons are used to trace heritage between individuals, and also to realize that we are related to the apes. The phylogenic tree can be established using several methods of gene comparisons.

Of course. That was my point. Again, creationists will not be satisfied with massive genetic change. I'm saying they won't be satisfied until they see a microbe turn into a salamander.

Edited to add: thanks for pointing out the E. coli study. I hope they get the chance to go out farther.