Quoting from a cherry picked quote cited in a blog from the Institute for Creation Research doesn't help your case. It just shows you to be in denial so deeply that you are either unwilling or incapable of being honest.<quoted text>
Well Mike and a few other of the evolutional topix geniuses on here must be "way smarter" than those scientist because they say they have evidence, even though it is not fact they've gathered enough non factual evidence that it evolved into fact, therefore it is fact, and they have factual/proof evolution of species is fact! LOL!!
So should we listen to renown scientist, or self proclaimed topix scientist who have evolved their non-factual evidence into fact?
,,,,,,and what about their doubt? How does their doubt fit into their non-factual evolved factual facts? Mike says we're too ignorant to understand the way his non-factual evidence evolved into fact,,, or wait a minute,,, was it we're too ignorant to understand that non-factual evidence turns into fact as long as enough people theorize that those non-factual evidence turns into fact?? LOL!!
Do you even wonder what the fruit fly reference is about? I can take a guess. An american species of fruit fly which feeds on hawthorn fruit switched to eating European apples. Those flies no longer associate with the original strain and this is in line with evolution and speciation - it is in fact one of your "long lost" transitional species. ToE predicts that accumulated mutations over a number of generations will alter the two sets of fruit flies to the point that they will no longer be genetically capable of producing viable offspring. That is inevitable - and fruit flies never read the Origin of Species. Even If fruit flies were the only example you would be proven wrong but unfortunately for you, it is not.